Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Hamstring Autografts and Bioabsorbable Interference Screw Fixation

Järvelä, Timo; Moisala, Anna-Stina; Sihvonen, Raine; Järvelä, Sally; Kannus, Pekka; Järvinen, Markku

doi:10.1177/0363546507308360

Cited by 174 publications

(191 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

171

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…28 Nine studies with a total of 335 patients which included Lysholm score were available for comparison. 6,18,[28][29][30][31][32][33][34] Similarly subjective IKDC score was reported in seven studies with 256 patients. IKDC score in our study was found to be comparable to that in other studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Arthroscopic anatomic double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Our experience with follow-up of 4 years

Morey

Nag

Chowdhury

et al. 2016

Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 89%

Arthroscopic anatomic double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Our experience with follow-up of 4 years

Morey

Nag

Chowdhury

et al. 2016

Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and Trauma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…[11][12][13][14][15][16] On the other hand, only a clinical report 17 has introduced a remnant-preserving technique for double-bundle ACL reconstruction, in which 2 femoral tunnels and one tibial tunnel were made, although anatomic double bundle ACL reconstruction procedures have recently attracted notice because of biomechanical advantages in laboratory studies. [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] However, no previous studies have shown clinical evidence about utility of the ACL remnant tissue preservation in ACL reconstruction as of yet. To verify whether preservation of the ACL remnant tissue can really improve proprioceptive functions and enhance revascularization, we should conduct a randomized comparative trial with a sufficient number of patients to compare the 2 ACL reconstruction procedures with and without the remnant preservation in terms of proprioception and revascularization of the graft.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Pilot Study of Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Ligament Remnant Tissue Preservation

Yasuda

Kondo

Kitamura

et al. 2012

Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The purpose of this pilot study is to clarify the preliminary results of an anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction procedure with ligament remnant tissues. Methods:Using the trans-tibial technique, 2 doubled semitendinosus tendons were grafted into 4 tunnels created at the center of each bundle attachment, penetrating the ACL remnant tissue. Forty-four patients (27 men and 17 women) with an isolated ACL injury underwent ACL reconstruction using this procedure. The mean age of subjects was 29 years (range: 17-58). Postoperative clinical evaluations were performed at 16.6 months on average (range: 12 -23). Radiological evaluations were also performed to evaluate the tunnel location in the femur and the tibia. Results:The average operation time was 86 minutes (range: 72 -96) in the cases with ACL reconstruction only. Postoperatively, the mean anterior laxity was 0.7 mm. The postoperative pivot-shift test was negative in 81.8 % of the patients, while there were no patients evaluated as ++. No patients showed any extension or flexion deficit. There were no patients evaluated as "Nearly abnormal" or "Abnormal" under the IKDC evaluation. The tunnel angles of the 4 tunnels were identical to those reported in the previous study. Conclusions:The minimal 1-year clinical results of anatomic double-bundle ACL 3 reconstruction with ligament remnant tissue preservation were comparable to the previously reported results of the anatomic double-bundle reconstruction without remnant tissue preservation.

show abstract

“…In this study, the femoral side tunnels were made using the free-hand technique through an anteromedial portal. Järvelä et al [37] reported longer follow-up (24-35 months) results in 2008. The study design included an SB group with metallic screws (N025), an SB group with bioabsorbable screws (N027) and a DB group with bioabsorbable screws (N025).…”

Section: Randomised Controlled Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Double-bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction: a review of literature

Suomalainen

Kannus

Järvelä³

2012

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been under intensive discussion and debate, although the anatomy of this ligament was resolved thoroughly almost 200 years ago. The ACL consist of two bundles, anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL). The conventional single-bundle method reconstructs the AM bundle only, while the modern double-bundle technique recreates both bundles for their anatomical sites. Methods An English language literature search was undertaken over the years 2000-2012 for ACL reconstruction, double-bundle versus single bundle technique. The search found 14 RCTs and two meta-analyses published to date. Results Two of the 14 studies (14 %) showed no difference between the two reconstruction methods while the remaining majority (12 trials, 86 %) concluded that the DB technique was better than the SB method. After the DB reconstruction, rotational stability of the knee was better in seven studies (50 %) and anteroposterior stability in six (43 %). No study spoke for the single-bundle technique. In addition, with the double-bundle technique knee scores were reported to be better in five (36 %) studies, and three trials (21 %) revealed less reoperations in the double-bundle group. Conclusions The double-bundle ACL reconstruction technique was reported to have better or at least the same results as the conventional single-bundle method-even at a fiveyear follow-up. However, the majority of these studies had a rather short follow-up, and thus, longer studies are needed to confirm the true long-term results of ACL surgery. Long follow-up periods are also needed to find out whether double-bundle ACL reconstruction can eventually prevent knee osteoarthritis.

show abstract

Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Hamstring Autografts and Bioabsorbable Interference Screw Fixation

Abstract: Rotational stability of the knee is better when using the double-bundle technique instead of the single-bundle technique in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Cited by 174 publications

References 33 publications

Arthroscopic anatomic double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Our experience with follow-up of 4 years

Arthroscopic anatomic double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Our experience with follow-up of 4 years

A Pilot Study of Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Ligament Remnant Tissue Preservation

Double-bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction: a review of literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About