A prospective study to evaluate the clinico-radiological outcomes of arthroscopic single bundle versus double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Devgan, Ashish; Rohilla, Rajesh; Singh, Amanpreet; Tanwar, Milind; Devgan, Radhika; Siwach, Karan

doi:10.1016/j.jcot.2016.01.004

Cited by 15 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our current study, all four included studies [ 33 , 35 – 37 ] found that no statistical difference was found in anterior stability regarding KT-1000 or KT-2000 measurements. It was in line with the previous studies [ 6 , 24 , 31 ]. The authors of these studies reported that both the DB and SB techniques could closely imitate the AMB in ACL reconstruction and thus acquire comparable anterior stability.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…ACL reconstruction is widely used to restore knee laxity, reestablish biomechanical homeostasis, and prevent the long-term joint degeneration [ 3 – 5 ]. In recent years, both single-bundle (SB) and double-bundle (DB) techniques were commonly used in ACL reconstruction [ 6 , 7 ]. However, up to now, no consensus has been reached on whether the DB technique was superior to the SB technique.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Meanwhile, some literature [ 19 – 23 ] indicated that the DB technique could acquire better knee stability, but get comparable postoperative functions to the SB technique. On the other hand, several researchers [ 6 , 22 , 24 – 28 ] found that both knee stability and clinical functions had no significant difference between the two techniques in ACL reconstruction. Given the diverse results of previous studies, it is imperative to pool the data to compare the DB and SB techniques and thus provide a reference for ACL reconstruction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Single-bundle versus double-bundle autologous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials at 5-year minimum follow-up

Chen

Tie

et al. 2018

J Orthop Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundBoth single-bundle (SB) and double-bundle (DB) techniques were widely used in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction recently. Nevertheless, up to now, no consensus has been reached on whether the DB technique was superior to the SB technique. Moreover, follow-up of the included studies in the published meta-analyses is mostly short term. Our study aims to compare the mid- to long-term outcome of SB and DB ACL reconstruction concerning knee stability, clinical function, graft failure rate, and osteoarthritis (OA) changes.MethodsThis study followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to October 2017. The study included only a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that compared SB and DB ACL reconstruction and that had a minimum of 5-year follow-up. The Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias for all included studies. Stata/SE 12.0 was used to perform a meta-analysis of the clinical outcome.ResultsFive RCTs were included, with a total of 294 patients: 150 patients and 144 patients in the DB group and the SB group, respectively. Assessing knee stability, there was no statistical difference in side-to-side difference and negative rate of the pivot-shift test. Considering functional outcome, no significant difference was found in proportion with International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) grade A, IKDC score, Lysholm scores, and Tegner scores. As for graft failure rate and OA changes, no significant difference was found between the DB group and the SB group.ConclusionThe DB technique was not superior to the SB technique in autologous ACL reconstruction regarding knee stability, clinical function, graft failure rate, and OA changes with a mid- to long-term follow-up.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Single-bundle versus double-bundle autologous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials at 5-year minimum follow-up

Chen

Tie

et al. 2018

J Orthop Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…No apparent differences were seen between the groups regarding osteoarthritic changes and tunnel widening after 2 and 5 years. 15 Devgan et al 19 conducted a study with a similar protocol. They performed an additional magnetic resonance imaging evaluation in 60 patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-Bundle Versus Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction—5-Year Results

Mayr

Bruder

Hube³

et al. 2018

Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The analysis of IKDC score [12], Lysholm score [13] and Tegner score [14] was performed in both group A and group B 6 hours before operation and 24 months after operation respectively. KT2000 [15] was also conducted to determine the degree of tibial retroversion preoperative and postoperative (24 months).…”

Section: Assessment Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the effect of the graft with double strands peroneus longus tendon and with the four strands hamstring tendon on reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament injury

Lü

Zhou

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This prospective study was to analyze the clinical effect of double-stranded long peroneal tendon and the four strands hamstring tendon in reconstruction of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), and to investigate the effectiveness and safety of the two surgical approaches in reconstruction of PCL, so as to provide guidance for clinical treatment of PCL injury. Methods Total 48 patients with complete rupture of PCL treated in our hospital from July 2015 to February 2017 were selected and divided into the Group A (reconstructed with double strands peroneus longus tendon, 25 cases) and the Group B (four strands hamstring tendon, 23 cases) according to the different grafts. Results The intraoperative time for tendon extraction in the Group A (20.87 ± 2.07 min) was significantly shorter than that in the Group B (26.79 ± 2.32 min). Compared with pre-operation, the tibial posterior displacement of the two groups decreased significantly 24 months after operation, and IKDC score, Lysholm score and Tegner score increased significantly. Nevertheless, the IKDC score, Lysholm score, Tegner score, AOFAS score and Maryland score between the two groups before and after operation were no significant differences. Compared with the quadrupled hamstring tendon, the double-stranded peroneal longus tendon has the advantages of simple and safe tendon extraction. Conclusions Both surgical methods are effective for the treatment of PCL injury. When the four strands hamstring tendon is accidental (tendon rupture or tendon variation) or ineffective, the peroneal longus tendon will be a good choice.

show abstract

A prospective study to evaluate the clinico-radiological outcomes of arthroscopic single bundle versus double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Cited by 15 publications

References 26 publications

Single-bundle versus double-bundle autologous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials at 5-year minimum follow-up

Single-bundle versus double-bundle autologous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials at 5-year minimum follow-up

Single-Bundle Versus Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction—5-Year Results

Comparison of the effect of the graft with double strands peroneus longus tendon and with the four strands hamstring tendon on reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament injury

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About