SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2014 / Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 4

Arthroscopic single-bundle versus triple-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Zhenxiang ZHANG
Beibei GU
Wei ZHU
Lixian ZHU
Qingsong LI
Yaqing DU
Pages
413–418
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Rotational stability was significantly superior in the TB group.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the clinical results of arthroscopic single-bundle (SB) and triple-bundle (TB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.Methods: The study included 105 patients who underwent arthroscopic SB ACL and TB ACL reconstruction.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Anterior stress radiographs and the maximal manual muscle test using a KT-2000 arthrometer were used to assess anteroposterior stability and rotational stability was investigated using the lateral pivot shift test at the 24th month follow-up.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Rotational stability was significantly superior in the TB group.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the clinical results of arthroscopic single-bundle (SB) and triple-bundle (TB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.Methods: The study included 105 patients who underwent arthroscopic SB ACL and TB ACL reconstruction. Anterior stress radiographs and the maximal manual muscle test using a KT-2000 arthrometer were used to assess anteroposterior stability and rotational stability was investigated using the lateral pivot shift test at the 24th month follow-up. Clinical results were assessed using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Orthopädische Arbeitsgruppe Knie (OAK) scores preoperatively and at the 24th month follow-up. Postoperative thigh circumference, strength and range of motion (ROM) were compared between groups.Results: Rotational stability was significantly superior in the TB group than in the SB group. There were no statistically significant differences with regard to residual anteroposterior laxity determined at the 24th month follow-up. No significant difference in terms of IKDC score, OAK score, thigh circumference, strength and ROM was detected between the two groups.Conclusion: Both arthroscoMedical Records Room, Taizhou People's Hospital Affiliated to Nantong University, Taizhou, Chinapic SB and TB ACL reconstruction resulted in satisfactory subjective outcome and objective stability. Rotational stability was significantly superior in the TB group.

🔖

Cite This Article

ZHANG, Z., GU, B., ZHU, W., ZHU, L., LI, Q., DU, Y. (2014). Arthroscopic single-bundle versus triple-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 4, 413–418. https://ajindex.com/articles/219710

References (11)

  1. Pujol N, Colombet P, Potel JF, Cucurulo T, Graveleau N, Hulet C, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in partial tear: selective anteromedial bundle reconstruc- tion conserving the posterolateral remnant versus single- bundle anatomic ACL reconstruction: preliminary 1-year results of a prospective randomized study. Orthop Trau- matol Surg Res 2012;98(8 Suppl):171-7.
  2. Xu Y, Ao Y, Wang J, Yu J, Cui G. Relation of tunnel en- largement and tunnel placement after single-bundle an- terior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 2011;27:923-32.
  3. Kowalchuk DA, Harner CD, Fu FH, Irrgang JJ. Predic- tion of patient-reported outcome after single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 2009;25:457-63.
  4. Bedi A, Musahl V, Steuber V, Kendoff D, Choi D, Allen AA, et al. Transtibial versus anteromedial portal reaming in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an anatomic and biomechanical evaluation of surgical technique. Ar- throscopy 2011;27:380-90.
  5. Markatos K, Kaseta MK, Lallos SN, Korres DS, Ef- stathopoulos N. The anatomy of the ACL and its impor- tance in ACL reconstruction. Eur J Orthop Surg Trauma- tol 2013;23:747-52. Madick S. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction of the knee. AORN J 2011;93:210-25.
  6. Webster KE, Palazzolo SE, McClelland JA, Feller JA. Tib- ial rotation during pivoting in anterior cruciate ligament reconstructed knees using a single bundle technique. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2012;27:480-4. van Eck CF, Lesniak BP, Schreiber VM, Fu FH. Anatomic single- and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament re- construction flowchart. Arthroscopy 2010;26:258-68.
  7. Yasuda K, Tanabe Y, Kondo E, Kitamura N, Tohyama H. Anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament re- construction. Arthroscopy 2010;26(9 Suppl):21-34.
  8. Xu M, Gao S, Zeng C, Han R, Sun J, Li H, et al. Out- comes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using single-bundle versus double-bundle technique: meta- analysis of 19 randomized controlled trials. Arthroscopy 2013;29:357-65.
  9. Kondo E, Merican AM, Yasuda K, Amis AA. Biome- chanical comparison of anatomic double-bundle, ana- tomic single-bundle, and nonanatomic single-bundle an- terior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Am J Sports Med 2011;39:279-88.
  10. Li YL, Ning GZ, Wu Q, Wu QL, Li Y, Hao Y, et al. Sin- gle-bundle or double-bundle for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Knee 2014;21:28-37.
  11. Xu M, Gao S, Zeng C, Han R, Sun J, Li H, et al. Out- comes of anterior cruciate liga