Purpose Despite encouraging clinical, biomechanical and histological results, ACL reconstruction using the ITB was slowly abandoned. The hypothesis was that the current literature supports the use of ITB as the graft of choice for ACL reconstruction because of its good outcomes. Methods A systematic search of the literature was performed in the PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Ovid databases to identify published clinical studies relevant to ACL reconstruction with ITB autograft and studies comparing ITB autograft with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and hamstring (HT) autografts (none were found). The results of the eligible studies were analyzed in terms of graft failure, instrumented knee laxity measurements, Lachman test, pivot-shift test, Lysholm score, objective and subjective International Knee Documentation committee (IKDC) scores, Tegner activity score, return to sports rate, return to sports at pre-injury level and complications. Results Nineteen clinical studies including 1,210 patients with ACL reconstruction met the inclusion criteria. Graft failure occurred after ITB autograft in 4.2% of patients. Postoperative mean side-to-side laxity was 1.41 mm with 21% of patients having greater than 3 mm side-to-side diference. Lachman test and pivot-shift test were negative (grade 0) in 57% and 85%, respectively, and were grade 0 or 1 in 95% and 97%, respectively. Functional outcomes were satisfactory in 84% of patients with good to excellent results (Lysholm score > 84). Mean postoperative Lysholm score was 93.3 and 84% of patients had an objective IKDC grade of A or B. Mean postoperative Tegner score was 6.8. The return to sports rate was 89% and 61% of patients returned to their pre-injury level. A comparison of 89 ITB versus 80 BPTB autografts revealed no signiicant diferences in graft failure (n.s.), instrumented mean side-to-side knee laxity diference (n.s.) or Tegner score (n.s.). ConclusionThe graft survival rate and clinical and functional outcomes for ITB autograft are satisfactory. By allowing ACL reconstruction and lateral tenodesis to be done with a single, continuous, pedicled graft through an outside-in femoral tunnel, this technique may become the preferred alternative for primary or secondary ACL surgery. Level of evidenceLevel IV Keywords Anterior cruciate ligament • Fascia lata • Iliotibial band • MacIntosh Abbreviations ACL Anterior cruciate ligament BPTB Bone-patellar tendon-bone CI Conidence intervals CMS Coleman methodological score HT Hamstring IKDC International knee documentation committee ITB Iliotibial band LCL Lateral collateral ligament MCMS Modiied Coleman methodological score n.s. Non-signiicant OCEBM Oxford centre for evidence-based medicine * Etienne Cavaignac
Background: Modular stems in revision total hip arthroplasties allow diaphyseal fixation and optimal restoration of the architecture of the proximal femur. Several studies report metaphyseal implant breakage in the mid- to long-term and therefore a huge impact on survivorship. We aimed to evaluate a specific design of uncemented modular fluted tapered stems (MFT) to analyze survivorship and clinical and radiological outcomes.Methods: In a retrospective study, we identified 99 patients who had surgery using the same design of MFT implant between 2012 and 2014. Patients were mainly male in 53% and mean age was 73 years. Indications were 33 aseptic loosening, 24 periprosthetic fractures, 23 periprosthetic joint infection, 1 instability and 18 were complex primary arthroplasties. Survivorship, complications and clinical outcomes, were assessed. Mean follow-up was 5 years.Results: There was no implant breakage. At 5-year follow-up, the survivorship free of revision for aseptic loosening and free of revision for any reason of the femoral stem were 100% and 99%, respectively. At last follow-up, they were 94% and 81%, respectively. Six implants were revised. A mean stem subsidence of 6 mm was noted in 9 cases; 1 was revised for aseptic loosening. The Harris hip score was 89. The risk of revision was significantly higher for shorter diaphyseal implants (p=0.026).Conclusion: At mid-term follow-up of 5 years, the MFT studied reported an excellent survivorship and clinical outcomes with no specific complications. Unlike literature reports, no specific complications occurred with this design. Satisfying clinical outcomes and limited subsidence are consistent with previous reports though.Level of evidence: IV – Case series
Background: The presence of a lateral meniscus root tear (LMRT) in patients with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear makes the knee more unstable and increases the risk of osteoarthritis and osteonecrosis. An all-inside suture repair technique without bone tunnels has been proposed to treat LMRT. Purpose: To compare the 1-year postoperative findings between patients who underwent ACL reconstruction combined with LMRT repair (LMRT group) and patients who underwent isolated ACL reconstruction (control group). Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The LMRT group consisted of 19 patients, and the control group consisted of 56 patients. In this study, the authors compared the postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings (meniscal extrusion, ghost sign, and hyperintensity in the tibial plateau beneath the LMRT), functional outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Lysholm, and Tegner scores), and reoperation rate between groups. The primary endpoint was analyzed by comparing, in the LMRT group, the 1-sided 97.5% confidence interval (CI) of the mean lateral meniscal extrusion at 1 year to the limit of noninferiority (fixed at 0.51). To take into account imbalanced baseline characteristics between groups, adjusted mean meniscal extrusion (with 1-sided 97.5% CI) was assessed using a linear regression model. Results: The mean follow-up was 12.2 months (range, 7.7-14.7 months) in the control group and 11.5 months (range, 7.1-13.0 months) in the LMRT group ( P = .06). For meniscal extrusion, the LMRT group was noninferior to the control group. The mean meniscal extrusion was 2.19 mm (97.5% CI, —infinity to 2.68 mm) in the LMRT group and 2.03 mm (97.5% CI,—infinity to 2.27 mm) in the control group, indicating that the upper boundary of the 1-sided 97.5% CI in the LMRT group was less than the noninferiority threshold of 2.78 (ie, 2.27 mm + 0.51 mm = 2.78 mm). There was a statistically significant difference in the IKDC score between the LMRT and control groups (77.2 ± 8.1 vs 80.3 ± 7.3, respectively; P = .04). There was no between-group difference in the other MRI parameters, the Lysholm and Tegner scores, or the reoperation rate. Conclusion: There was no significant difference in extrusion on MRI or clinical outcomes at 1-year follow-up in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with all-inside LMRT repair compared with patients who did not have an LMRT.
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.