Journals / Düzce Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 3

Clinical Comparison of Patients Undergoing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using an Allograft or Autograft

Allogreft ve Otogreft Kullanılarak Ön Çapraz Bağ Rekonstrüksiyonu Yapılan Hastaların Klinik Karşılaştırması

Pages
257–262
Publication Date
2022-12-30
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: In terms of knee function and laxity, this study achieved a better clinical outcome in the allograft group compared to the autograft group.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The purpose of this study was to examine the clinical results of individuals who underwent an autograft or allograft repair of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: Retrospective analysis was done on the patient files of patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between 2014 and 2020 using semitendinosus-gracilis tendon autografts (SGT-A) and tibialis anterior tendon allografts (TAT-A).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: In terms of knee function and laxity, this study achieved a better clinical outcome in the allograft group compared to the autograft group.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Ön çapraz bağ · allogreft · artroskopi

Abstract

Aim: The purpose of this study was to examine the clinical results of individuals who underwent an autograft or allograft repair of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Material and Methods: Retrospective analysis was done on the patient files of patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between 2014 and 2020 using semitendinosus-gracilis tendon autografts (SGT-A) and tibialis anterior tendon allografts (TAT-A). In this study, the data of 30 patients in each group were included. Knee laxity tests, the Lysholm knee grading system, the Tegner activity score, and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score were used to compare patient results. Results: While there was no significant difference in the Tegner activity score between the preoperative and the final measurement (p=0.241), the IKDC scores and the Lysholm knee ratings changed statistically significantly between the preoperative measurement and the last control visit (p=0.020, and p=0.038, respectively) for both groups in this study. The SGT-A group’s Lysholm knee score had a preoperative value of 60.97% and a final control value of 90.48%. The preoperative Lysholm knee score for the TAT-A group was 61.31%, and the final control value was 95.03%. The anterior drawer and Lachman test findings showed statistically significant intergroup (autograft and allograft) alterations in both the autograft and allograft groups (both p<0.001). Conclusion: In terms of knee function and laxity, this study achieved a better clinical outcome in the allograft group compared to the autograft group.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, ön çapraz bağın (ÖÇB) otogreft veya allogreft onarımı yapılmış olan bireylerin klinik sonuçlarının incelenmesidir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: 2014 ve 2020 yılları arasında semitendinosus-gracilis tendon otogreftleri (semitendinosus-gracilis tendon autografts, SGT-A) ve tibialis anterior tendon allogreftleri (tibialis anterior tendon allografts, TAT-A) kullanılmak suretiyle ÖÇB rekonstrüksiyonu yapılmış olan hastaların dosyaları üzerinde geriye dönük olarak analiz yapıldı. Bu çalışmaya her iki grupta da 30 hastanın verileri dahil edildi. Hastaların sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması amacıyla diz laksite testleri, Lysholm diz skorlama sistemi, Tegner aktivite skoru ve Uluslararası Diz Dokümantasyon Komitesi (International Knee Documentation Committee, IKDC) skoru kullanıldı. Bulgular: Preoperatif ölçüm ile son ölçüm arasında Tegner aktivite skoru bakımından anlamlı bir fark yokken (p=0,241), IKDC skorları ve Lysholm diz skorlamaları, bu çalışmadaki her iki grup için de preoperatif ölçüm ve son kontrol ziyareti arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir şekilde değişti (sırasıyla, p=0,020 ve p=0,038). SGT-A grubu Lysholm diz skorunun preoperatif değeri %60,97 ve son kontrol değeri ise %90,48 idi. TAT-A grubu için preoperatif Lysholm diz skoru değeri %61,31 ve son kontrol değeri ise %95,03 idi. Ön çekmece ve Lachman test bulguları, hem otogreft hem de allogreft gruplarında gruplar arası (otogreft ve allogreft) istatistiksel olarak anlamlı şekilde değişiklikler gösterdi (her iki p<0,001). Sonuç: Bu çalışmada diz fonksiyonu ve laksite açısından, otogreft grubuna kıyasla allogreft grubunda daha iyi klinik sonuç elde edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ALTUNKILIÇ, T., ARI, B., ŞAHİN, E., GÜZEL, İ., İNCEOĞLU, F. (2022). Clinical Comparison of Patients Undergoing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using an Allograft or Autograft. Düzce Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 3, 257–262. https://ajindex.com/articles/858950

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Herzog MM, Marshall SW, Lund JL, Pate V, Mack CD, Spang JT. Trends in incidence of ACL reconstruction and concomitant procedures among commercially insured individuals in the United States, 2002-2014. Sports Health. 2018;10(6):523-31.
  2. Nicholls M, Aspelund T, Ingvarsson T, Briem K. Nationwide study highlights a second peak in ACL tears for women in their early forties. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(2):648-54.
  3. Fodor P, Sólyom A, Ivănescu A, Fodor R, Bățagă T. Prevalence of chondral lesions in knee arthroscopy. J Interdiscip Med. 2018;3(1):21-4.
  4. Nwachukwu BU, Patel BH, Lu Y, Allen AA, Williams RJ 3rd. Anterior cruciate ligament repair outcomes: an updated systematic review of recent literature. Arthroscopy. 2019;35(7):2233-47.
  5. Etzel CM, Nadeem M, Gao B, Boduch AN, Owens BD. Graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in women aged 25 years and younger: a systematic review. Sports Health. 2022;14(6):829-41.
  6. Mahiroğullari M, Kuşkucu M, Kiral A, Pehlivan O, Akmaz I, Tirmik U. Early results of reconstruction of chronic anterior cruciate ligament ruptures using four-strand hamstring tendon autografts. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2005;39(3):224-30.
  7. Turkish. Arnold MP, Calcei JG, Vogel N, Magnussen RA, Clatworthy M, Spalding T, et al. ACL study group survey reveals the evolution of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction graft choice over the past three decades. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021;29(11):3871-6.
  8. Bianchi N, Sacchetti F, Bottai V, Gesi M, Carlisi A, Facchini A, et al. LARS versus hamstring tendon autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a single-centre, single surgeon retrospective study with 8 years of follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2019;29(2):447-53.
  9. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41(4):1149-60.
  10. Beck NA, Lawrence JTR, Nordin JD, DeFor TA, Tompkins M. ACL tears in school-aged children and adolescents over 20 years. Pediatrics. 2017;139(3):e20161877. Widner M, Dunleavy M, Lynch S. Outcomes following ACL reconstruction based on graft type: are all grafts equivalent? Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2019;12(4):460-5.
  11. Buerba RA, Boden SA, Lesniak B. Graft selection in contemporary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2021;5(10):e21.00230. Arida C, Tsikrikas CG, Mastrokalos DS, Panagopoulos A, Vlamis J, Triantafyllopoulos IK. Comparison of bone