Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

Adjustable-Loop Cortical Suspensory Fixation Results in Greater Tibial Tunnel Widening Compared to Interference Screw Fixation in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructionopen access

Authors
Lee, Tae-JinJang, Ki-MoKim, Tae-JinLee, Sang-MinBae, Ji-Hoon
Issue Date
Sep-2022
Publisher
MDPI
Keywords
adjustable-loop device; anterior cruciate ligament; autograft; bone tunnel widening; hamstring tendon; interference screw; reconstruction
Citation
MEDICINA-LITHUANIA, v.58, no.9
Indexed
SCIE
SCOPUS
Journal Title
MEDICINA-LITHUANIA
Volume
58
Number
9
URI
https://scholar.korea.ac.kr/handle/2021.sw.korea/144092
DOI
10.3390/medicina58091193
ISSN
1010-660X
Abstract
Background: Although the use of adjustable-loop suspensory fixation has increased in recent years, the influence of the shortcomings of suspensory fixation, such as the bungee-cord or windshield-wiper effects, on tunnel widening remains to be clarified. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspensory fixation and interference screw fixation in terms of tunnel widening and clinical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). We hypothesized that tunnel widening in the adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspensory fixation (AL) group would be comparable to that in the interference screw fixation (IF) group. Methods: This study evaluated patients who underwent primary ACLR at our institution between March 2015 and June 2019. The femoral and tibial tunnel diameters were measured using plain radiographs in the immediate postoperative period and 2 years after ACLR. Tunnel widening and clinical outcomes (Lysholm score, 2000 International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, and Tegner activity level) were compared between the two groups. Results: There were 48 patients (mean age, 29.8 +/- 12.0 years) in the AL group and 44 patients (mean age, 26.0 +/- 9.5 years) in the IF group. Tunnel widening was significantly greater in the AL group than that in the IF group at the tibia anteroposterior (AP) middle (2.03 mm vs. 1.32 mm, p = 0.017), tibia AP distal (1.52 mm vs. 0.84 mm, p = 0.012), tibia lateral proximal (1.85 mm vs. 1.00 mm, p = 0.001), tibia lateral middle (2.36 mm vs. 1.03 mm, p < 0.001), and tibia lateral distal (2.34 mm vs. 0.85 mm, p < 0.001) levels. There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to femoral tunnel widening and clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Tibial tunnel widening was significantly greater in the AL group than in the IF group at 2 years after primary ACLR. However, the clinical outcomes in the two groups were comparable at 2 years.
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
College of Medicine > Department of Medical Science > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE