SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi / 2021 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 2

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with ToggleLoc with ZipLoop system versus transfix system: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Guzelali OZDEMİR
Sualp TURAN
Olgun BİNGÖL
Alper DEVECİ
Enver KILIÇ
Hüseyin ASLAN
Pages
231–237
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)

CONCLUSION: According to our results, ToggleLoc with ZipLoop technique was a more cost-effective method than the Transfix technique in the anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament tears using either ToggleLoc with ZipLoop or Transfix systems.
📊
Key Findings & Data:METHODS: This study is a cost-effectiveness analysis of patients with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, ToggleLoc with ZipLoop and Transfix systems in our clinic between 2011 and 2016.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONCLUSION: According to our results, ToggleLoc with ZipLoop technique was a more cost-effective method than the Transfix technique in the anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament tears using either ToggleLoc with ZipLoop or Transfix systems. METHODS: This study is a cost-effectiveness analysis of patients with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, ToggleLoc with ZipLoop and Transfix systems in our clinic between 2011 and 2016. This study was a retrospective cross-sectional study of patient’s demographic, clinical and financial data. The effectiveness of surgery on patients with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction was determined by the Lysholm Knee Score Scale. We compared two systems with the cost-effectiveness ratio. RESULTS: In this study, 103 patients were included. According to the Lysholm Knee Score Scales in both groups, the findings showed that there was no difference in effectiveness between them. The ToggleLoc with ZipLoop technique was cost-effectiveness ratio 254,57 and the Transfix technique cost-effectiveness ratio was 378,33. CONCLUSION: According to our results, ToggleLoc with ZipLoop technique was a more cost-effective method than the Transfix technique in the anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

🔖

Cite This Article

OZDEMİR, G., TURAN, S., BİNGÖL, O., DEVECİ, A., KILIÇ, E., ASLAN, H. (2021). Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with ToggleLoc with ZipLoop system versus transfix system: A cost-effectiveness analysis. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 2, 231–237. https://ajindex.com/articles/418680

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Lyman S, Koulouvaris P, Sherman S, Do H, Mandl LA, Marx RG. Epidemiology of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: trends, readmissions, and subsequent knee surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009;91:2321−8
  2. Griffin LY, Albohm MJ, Arendt EA, Bahr R, Beynnon BD, Demaio M, et al. Understanding and preventing noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injuries: a review of the Hunt Valley II meeting, January 2005. Am J Sports Med 2006;34:1512−32
  3. Eajazi A, Madadi F, Madadi F, Boreiri M. Comparison of different methods of femoral fixation anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Acta Med Iran 2013;51:444−8
  4. Williams RJ 3rd, Hyman J, Petrigliano F, Rozental T, Wickiewicz TL. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a four-strand hamstring tendon autograft. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86:225−32
  5. Gelir İdaresi Başkanlığı. Yeniden Değerlendirme Oranları. Available from:
  6. Lysholm J, Gillquist J. Evaluation of knee ligament surgery results with special emphasis on use of a scoring scale. Am J Sports Med 1982;10:150−4
  7. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Sosyal Güvenlik Kurumu. Sağlık Uygulama Tebliği. Available from:
  8. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart, GL, Torrance GW. Introduction to Economic Evaluation. In: Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 4th Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.p:1−19
  9. Hutton G, Rhfuess E. Introduction. In: World Health Organization. Guidelines for conducting cost–benefit analysis of household energy and health interventions. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2006.p.1−8
  10. Getzen ET, Allen BH. Cost-Benefit and Cost-effectiveness Analysis. Making the Most of Limited Funds. In: Health Care Economics. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley&Sons; 2007.p.47−73
  11. Zhang Q, Hao G, Gu M, Cao X. Tibial tunnel enlargement and joint instability after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A prospective comparison between autograft and allograft. Acta Cir Bras 2017;32:1064−74
  12. Collins NJ, Misra D, Felson DT, Crossley KM, Roos EM. Measures of knee function: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Short Form (KOOS-PS), Knee Outcome Survey Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADL), Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Oxfo