Prospective comparison between remnant-preserving augmentation and double-bundle reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament tears

Noam Shohat, Dror Lindner, Eran Tamir, Yiftah Beer, Gabriel Agar

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: The debate continues regarding the best way to manage partial anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears. Objectives: To prospectively compare the clinical outcomes of remnant-preserving augmentation (RPA) and double-bundle reconstruction (DBR) in patients with ACL tears. Methods: In this prospective study, we included 13 cases of RPA and 30 cases of DBR with a follow-up period of 6 months, 12 months and 24 months. We clinically compared the preoperative and postoperative range of motion, Knee Society Score (KSS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Lysholm score, Tegner activity score, Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), thigh and calf circumference and anterior translation (using the KT-1000 knee arthrometer). Results: There were no significant differences in Lysholm score, Tegner score, VAS or KSS within the two groups at any time. The KT-1000 arthrometer results were higher in the RPA group at 6 months than in the DBR group; however, they did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: We found no significant differences between the two specific groups leading us to believe that RPA may play a role in reconstruction when only a single bundle is injured.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)355-359
Number of pages5
JournalIsrael Medical Association Journal
Volume19
Issue number6
StatePublished - Jun 2017
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)
  • Augmentation
  • Double-bundle reconstruction (DBR)
  • Reconstruction
  • Remnant-preserving augmentation (RPA)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Prospective comparison between remnant-preserving augmentation and double-bundle reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament tears'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this