scholarly journals Proprioception recovery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Isokinetic versus dynamic exercises

2021 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 289-293
Author(s):  
Dragana Dragičević-Cvjetković ◽  
Tatjana Erceg-Rukavina ◽  
Siniša Nikolić
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Isokinetic Dynamometer ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Postoperative Rehabilitation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Proprioceptive Training ◽  
Group A ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background/Aim: Proprioception recovery is one of the main postoperative rehabilitation goals after the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The aim of this study was to examine the level of proprioception recovery in patients 9 months after the ACL reconstruction using hamstring graft. Methods: A prospective study followed 70 male subjects (mean age 27.36 ± 5.94) divided into two groups depending on the type of proprioceptive exercise applied. Group A patients (n = 35) underwent proprioceptive training on a Biodex 4 Pro System isokinetic dynamometer for 10 minutes 5 times per week. In group B, patients underwent proprioception exercises in the gym for 10 minutes 5 times per week. The degree of recovery of proprioception was measured on an isokinetic dynamometer preoperatively and 9 months after ACL reconstruction. Flexion angles in the operated knee of 15, 30 and 45 degrees were monitored. The Chi-square test was used for statistical analyses. The value of p < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: A significant difference was found in the recovery of proprioception in patients depending on the type of training applied. Statistically significant recovery of proprioception was observed in patients from both groups 9 months after ACL reconstruction, but it was better in patients of group A (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Applying proprioceptive training on an isokinetic dynamometer achieves better proprioceptive recovery in patients 9 months after ACL reconstruction versus dynamic exercises in the gym.

scholarly journals Similar Outcomes and Satisfaction of the Proprioceptive Versus Standard Training on the Knee Function and Proprioception, Following the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 3494
Author(s):  
Paweł Bąkowski ◽  
Kinga Ciemniewska-Gorzela ◽  
Kamilla Bąkowska-Żywicka ◽  
Łukasz Stołowski ◽  
Tomasz Piontek
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Postoperative Rehabilitation ◽  
Acl Injuries ◽  
Proprioceptive Training ◽  
Standard Training ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Rehabilitation Exercises ◽  
Knee Functionality

Background: Patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries have poorer proprioception than people without such injuries. The effects of proprioceptive training on knee functionality and proprioceptive improvement after ACL reconstruction is still unclear. Methods: The research material consisted of 40 patients after ACL reconstruction. Of the 40 patients, 20 of them were rehabilitated with a standard program and 20 with additional proprioceptive exercises. The subjective and the objective scores were evaluated. Results: No differences were found between the proprioceptive versus the conservative postoperative rehabilitation in the functional nor in the proprioception outcomes of the operated limbs. Conclusions: There is no advantage to function in doing proprioceptive rehabilitation exercises following the ACL reconstruction, when compared with a traditional strengthening program.

scholarly journals Performance of the PROMIS in Patients After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 232596711877450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth J. Scott ◽  
Robert Westermann ◽  
Nathalie A. Glass ◽  
Carolyn Hettrich ◽  
Brian R. Wolf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Physical Function ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Floor Effects ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Pro Instruments

Background: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) is designed to advance patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments by utilizing question banks for major health domains. Purpose: To compare the responsiveness and construct validity of the PROMIS physical function computer adaptive test (PF CAT) with current PRO instruments for patients before and up to 2 years after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Initially, 157 patients completed the PROMIS PF CAT, Short Form–36 Health Survey (SF-36 physical function [PF] and general health [GH]), Marx Activity Rating Scale (MARS), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS activities of daily living [ADL], sport, and quality of life [QOL]), and EuroQol–5 dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 2 years after ACL reconstruction. Correlations between instruments, ceiling and floor effects, effect sizes (Cohen d), and standardized response means to describe responsiveness were evaluated. Subgroup analyses compared participants with and without additional arthroscopic procedures using linear mixed models. Results: At baseline, 6 weeks, and 6 months, the PROMIS PF CAT showed excellent or excellent-good correlations with the SF-36 PF ( r = 0.75-0.80, P < .01), KOOS-ADL ( r = 0.63-0.70, P < .01), and KOOS-sport ( r = 0.32-0.69, P < .01); excellent-good correlation with the EQ-5D ( r = 0.60-0.71, P < .01); and good correlation with the KOOS-QOL ( r = 0.52-0.58, P < .01). As expected, there were poor correlations with the MARS ( r = 0.00-0.24, P < .01) and SF-36 GH ( r = 0.16-0.34, P < .01 ). At 2 years, the PROMIS PF CAT showed good to excellent correlations with all PRO instruments ( r = 0.42-0.72, P < .01), including the MARS ( r = 0.42, P < .01), indicating frequent return to preinjury function. The PROMIS PF CAT had the fewest ceiling or floor effects of all instruments tested, and patients answered, on average, 4 questions. There was no significant difference in baseline physical function scores between subgroups; at follow-up, all groups showed improvements in scores that were not statistically different. Conclusion: The PROMIS PF CAT is a valid tool to assess outcomes after ACL reconstruction up to 2 years after surgery, demonstrating the highest responsiveness to change with the fewest ceiling and floor effects and a low time burden among all instruments tested. The PROMIS PF CAT is a beneficial alternative for assessing physical function in adults before and after ACL reconstruction.

Outcomes After Biologically Augmented Isolated Meniscal Repair With Marrow Venting Are Comparable With Those After Meniscal Repair With Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2017 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 1341-1348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chase S. Dean ◽  
Jorge Chahla ◽  
Lauren M. Matheny ◽  
Justin J. Mitchell ◽  
Robert F. LaPrade
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Repair ◽  
Intercondylar Notch ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Outcome Scores ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Biological Augmentation

Background: Meniscal repair in the setting of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has demonstrated superior outcomes compared with isolated meniscal repair. Limited evidence exists for the effects of biological augmentation in isolated meniscal repair, particularly as compared with meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes and survivorship of meniscal repair in 2 cohorts of patients: meniscal repair with biological augmentation using a marrow venting procedure (MVP) of the intercondylar notch, and meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction. We hypothesized that the clinical outcomes and survivorship of meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction would be improved compared with meniscal repair with biological augmentation. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Inclusion criteria were skeletally mature patients aged ≥16 years who underwent inside-out meniscal repair and either a concomitant MVP of the intercondylar notch or ACL reconstruction. Patients were excluded from this study if they were skeletally immature, underwent meniscus root or radial tear repair, or underwent meniscal repair with concurrent ligamentous reconstruction not limited to the ACL. At the preoperative evaluation and a minimum 2 years after the index meniscal repair procedure, patients were administered a subjective questionnaire. Differences in outcome scores, survivorship, and failure rates between the cohorts were assessed. Failure was defined as reoperation with meniscectomy or revision meniscal repair. Results: There were 109 patients (52 female, 57 male) who met the inclusion criteria for this study. There were 37 knees in cohort 1 (isolated meniscal repair plus MVP) and 72 knees in cohort 2 (meniscal repair plus ACL reconstruction). The failure status was known in 95 patients, and patient-reported outcome scores were obtained in 89 (82%) patients. Both cohorts demonstrated a significant improvement in all outcome scores, and there was no significant difference in any of the preoperative or postoperative outcome measures. The overall failure rate was 9.5% (9/95). There were 4 (12.9%) failures in cohort 1 and 5 failures (7.8%) in cohort 2, with no significant difference in failures between the cohorts ( P = .429). There was a significant association between failure and female sex ( P = .001). Conclusion: The most important finding in this study was that there was no difference in outcomes in meniscal repair performed with biological augmentation using an MVP versus that performed concomitantly with ACL reconstruction. The similar outcomes reported for meniscal repair with an MVP and meniscal repair with ACL reconstruction may be partly attributed to biological augmentation.

Surgical Management of Simultaneous Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Patellar Tendon Ruptures: A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (09) ◽  
pp. 875-883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Meheux ◽  
Robert Jack ◽  
Patrick McCulloch ◽  
David Lintner ◽  
Joshua Harris
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Activity Level ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
One Stage ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
The One

AbstractThis study performs a systematic review to determine (1) if a significant difference exists in return to preinjury activity level between one- and two-stage treatment of combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and patellar tendon (PT) tears; and (2) if a significant difference exists in the number of postoperative complications between the two differing surgical treatment approaches. A systematic review was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and registered on PROSPERO. MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, SCOPUS, and Sport Discus were searched for English language level I–IV evidence studies on either one- (simultaneous) or two-stage (sequential) surgical treatment of simultaneously sustained ipsilateral ACL and PT tears. The approach to initial evaluation, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes were qualitatively analyzed. Methodological quality assessment of all included studies was completed using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to assess quality of evidence and provide strength of recommendation. Statistical analyses were done using Fischer's exact test. Eleven articles (18 patients; 83% males; mean age, 31.1 ± 10.1 years; mean follow-up, 2.2 ± 1.7 years; and mean MINORS 7.8/16) were analyzed. Eight patients had a one-stage procedure (primary PT repair and ACL reconstruction), and 10 patients underwent a two-stage procedure (primary PT repair first followed by ACL reconstruction) with mean 28 ± 45.7 weeks (5 weeks–3 years) between surgeries. The rate for return to preinjury activity level after surgery was not significantly different between one- (88%) and two-stage (100%) (p = 0.444). There was a significantly higher complication rate (p = 0.023) in the one-stage (stiffness, instability, and patella baja) versus two-stage surgery (no complications). There was no significant difference in return to preinjury activity level between one- and two-stage PT repair and ACL reconstruction. However, the one-stage combined surgery had a significantly higher complication rate compared with two-stage surgery. The level of evidence is IV.

Clinical Outcome of Fixed Versus Adjustable Loop Cortical Suspension Devices in Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 181-185
Author(s):  
Ramy Said Assaad Ahmed Mohamed ◽  
Mohamed Hossam El-Din El-Shafie ◽  
Mohamed Ahmed El-Sheikh
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Loop Group ◽  
Lysholm Score ◽  
Graft Fixation ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has remained the gold standard for ACL injuries, especially for young individuals and athletes exposed to high level sporting activities aiming to return to their preinjury level of activity. Cortical suspensory femoral fixation is commonly performed for graft fixation to the femur in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring tendons. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical results of using fixed and adjustable loop cortical suspension devices in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale after 12 months postoperatively. Material and methods. This study included a total of sixty patients who underwent transportal arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using a hamstring tendon autograft from November 2016 to December 2017. For femoral graft fixation, a fixed-length loop device was used in 30 patients (fixed-loop group) and an adjustable-length loop device was used in 30 patients (adjustable-loop group) randomly.For tibial graft fixation, interference screw was used for all patients. Results. The present study shows that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding the Lysholm score with highly statistically significant difference between preoperative and postoperative Lysholm score in each group separately. Conclusion. Both fixed loop and adjustable loop devices in ACL reconstruction provided good clinical outcomes but without significant statistical difference between both groups from the clinical point of view postoperatively using the Lysholm score.

scholarly journals In Vitro Testing of 2 Adjustable-Loop Cortical Suspensory Fixation Systems Versus Interference Screw for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 232596712110316
Author(s):  
Gerardo L. Garcés ◽  
Oscar Martel ◽  
Alejandro Yánez ◽  
Ignacio Manchado-Herrera ◽  
Luci M. Motta
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Failure Load ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Interference Screw ◽  
Yield Load ◽  
Ultimate Failure Load ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Ultimate Failure ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: It is not clear whether the mechanical strength of adjustable-loop suspension devices (ALDs) in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is device dependent and if these constructs are different from those of an interference screw. Purpose: To compare the biomechanical differences of 2 types of ALDs versus an interference screw. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: ACL reconstruction was performed on porcine femurs and bovine extensor tendons with 3 types of fixation devices: interference screw, UltraButton (UB) ALD, and TightRope (TR) ALD (n = 10 for each). In addition to specimen testing, isolated testing of the 2 ALDs was performed. The loading protocol consisted of 3 stages: preload (static 150 N load for 5 minutes), cyclic load (50-250 N at 1 Hz for 1000 cycles), and load to failure (crosshead speed 50 mm/min). Displacement at different cycles, ultimate failure load, yield load, stiffness, and failure mode were recorded. Results: In specimen testing, displacement of the ALDs at the 1000th cycle was similar (3.42 ± 1.34 mm for TR and 3.39 ± 0.92 mm for UB), but both were significantly lower than that of the interference screw (7.54 ± 3.18 mm) ( P < .001 for both). The yield load of the UB (547 ± 173 N) was higher than that of the TR (420 ± 72 N) ( P = .033) or the interference screw (386 ± 51 N; P = .013), with no significant difference between the latter 2. In isolated device testing, the ultimate failure load of the TR (862 ± 64 N) was significantly lower than that of the UB (1879 ± 126 N) ( P < .001). Conclusion: Both ALDs showed significantly less displacement in cyclic loading at ultimate failure than the interference screw. The yield load of the UB was significantly higher than that of the other 2. The ultimate failure occurred at a significantly higher load for UB than it did for TR in isolated device testing. Clinical Relevance: Both UB and TR provided stronger fixation than an interference screw. Although difficult to assess, intrinsic differences in the mechanical properties of these ALDs may affect clinical outcomes.

scholarly journals Meniscal Repair with Concurrent Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is ACL Graft Choice Predictive of Meniscal Repair Success?

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (7_suppl5) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0035
Author(s):  
Hytham S. Salem ◽  
Laura J. Huston ◽  
Alex Zajichek ◽  
Michelle Lora Wolcott ◽  
Eric C. McCarty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Tear ◽  
Meniscal Repair ◽  
Acl Graft ◽  
Baseline Activity ◽  
Graft Choice ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Objectives: The success rate of meniscal repair is known to increase with concurrent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, the influence of ACL graft choice has not been described. The current study examines the effect of ACL graft choice on the outcome of meniscal repair performed in conjunction with ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Methods: Patients who underwent meniscal repair with concurrent primary ACLR were identified from a longitudinal, prospective cohort. Patient demographics and subjective outcome measures including the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Marx activity rating scale were collected preoperatively. Arthroscopic assessment of meniscal tear characteristics and associated repair technique were recorded intraoperatively. Patients with subsequent repair failure, defined as any subsequent surgical procedure addressing the meniscus repaired at index surgery, were identified and operative notes were obtained in order to accurately classify pathology and treatment. A logistic regression model was built to assess the association of patient specific factors, ACL graft, baseline Marx activity level and meniscal tear laterality with the occurrence of repair failure at 6-year follow-up. Results: A total of 646 patients underwent ACLR with concurrent meniscal repair. Bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) and soft tissue (ST) autograft were used in 55.7% and 33.9% of cases, respectively, while allografts were utilized in the remaining cases. Table 1 summarizes the univariate analysis of each baseline variable. A total of 101 patients (15.6%) required subsequent surgery on the meniscus repaired at index surgery, including 89 meniscectomies (87 partial, 2 subtotal), 11 revision meniscal repairs, and 1 meniscus allograft transplantation. No statistically significant difference in meniscal repair failure rate was observed based on patient age, sex, BMI or smoking status. The odds of meniscal repair failure within 6 years of surgery for patients with only a lateral meniscal repair are 68% less than those with only a medial meniscal repair (CI: 41%, 83%; p<0.001). There is a statistically significant relationship between baseline Marx activity and the risk of subsequent meniscal repair, though it is nonlinear—patients with low or high baseline activity are at the highest risk of meniscal repair failure (CI: 1.05,1.31; p=0.004, Figure 1). The estimated odds of meniscal repair failure for BTB allograft, ST allograft, and ST autograft were 2.78 (CI: 0.84,9.19; p=0.09), 2.29 (CI: 0.97,5.45; p=0.06), and 1.42 (CI:0.87,2.32; p=0.16) times that of BTB autograft, respectively, although none proved statistically significant. Meniscal repair failure is associated with significantly lower 6-year scores for all KOOS components and the IKDC (p<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in MARX activity at 6-years (p=0.27). Conclusion: In the setting of primary ACLR, the risk of meniscal repair failure is increased with medial versus lateral meniscal repair. Patients with low or high baseline activity levels are also at an increased risk. ACL graft choice seems to have an effect on meniscal repair failure that approaches but does not reach statistical significance. A larger sample size may be required to accept the null hypothesis. [Table: see text][Figure: see text]

scholarly journals Hybrid Transtibial Femoral Preparation for Transphyseal Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Radiographic Comparison With the Transtibial and Anteromedial Portal Techniques

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 232596712110545
Author(s):  
D. Landry Jarvis ◽  
Danica D. Vance ◽  
Emily K. Reinke ◽  
Jonathan C. Riboh
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Femoral Tunnel ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Calculated Data ◽  
Significant Finding ◽  
Anteromedial Portal ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Tunnel Angle

Background: Transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains the most commonly used technique for pubescent patients. The transtibial (TT) drilling technique creates vertical and central femoral tunnels to minimize the physeal area of injury at the expense of a nonanatomic femoral tunnel. The hybrid TT (HTT) technique offers the potential of an anatomic femoral position with tunnel geometry similar to that using the TT technique. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to perform a radiographic comparison of the HTT technique with TT and anteromedial portal (AM) techniques in adolescent patients undergoing transphyseal ACL reconstruction. It was hypothesized that femoral tunnels created during HTT would be similar to TT tunnels but significantly more vertical and central than AM tunnels. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: We retrospectively screened primary transphyseal ACL reconstructions performed in adolescents at our institution between 2013 and 2019. The youngest 20 eligible patients were selected from each technique cohort: TT, AM, and HTT. Postoperative radiographs were assessed for the coronal femoral tunnel angle, as well as the location of the tunnel-physis penetration on the anteroposterior and lateral views. Physeal lesion surface area was calculated. Data were compared among the 3 groups using 1-way analysis of variance followed by pairwise comparisons. Results: Included were 47 patients with a mean ± SD age of 14.3 ± 1.2 years (n = 9 with TT, 18 with AM, and 20 with HTT techniques). The coronal tunnel angle was significantly more vertical in the TT (60.7° ± 7.2°) and HTT (54.4° ± 5.7) groups as compared with the AM group (48.8° ± 5.9; P = .0037 and P = .02, respectively). There was no significant difference between the TT and HTT groups ( P = .066). The only significant finding regarding femoral tunnel location was that the HTT tunnels (28.9% ± 4.8%) penetrated the physis more centrally than did the AM tunnels (20.0% ± 5.1%; P = .00002) on lateral radiographs. Conclusion: The HTT technique presents an option for transphyseal ACL reconstruction, with femoral tunnel obliquity and estimated physeal disruption similar to that of the TT technique and significantly less than that of the AM technique. The HTT technique also results in the most central physeal perforation of all techniques, predominantly in the sagittal plane.

scholarly journals Analysis of Motor Coordination Alteration after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (85) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vilma Jurevičienė ◽  
Dovilė Kielė ◽  
Ričardas Jurevičius ◽  
Tadas Česnaitis
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Knee Joint ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Motor Coordination ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Movement Coordination ◽  
Coordination Test ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Injured Knee

Research background and hypothesis. The Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is the most commonly injured ligament of the knee and its injuries result in significant functional impairment. Injury to the ACL is associated with altered knee joint loading and impaired neuromuscular control, which defined as the ability to produce well controlled movements and dynamic balance.Research aim. The aim of this study was to evaluate motor  coordination  and functional capacity of patients who received rehabilitation program following ACL reconstruction.Research methods. The study included 15 males aged 33.7 ± 2.49 years who had undergone unilateral ACL reconstruction  with  a  semitendinosus/gracilis  (STG)  graft  in  Kaunas  Clinical  hospital.  For  objective  functional testing, we used figure-of-eight movement coordination test. The Lysholm questionnaire was included as a disability outcome measure following ACL injury and reconstruction.  The patients were assessed preoperatively and after 5 and 21weeks postoperatively.Research  results.  The  results  of  this  study  indicated  that  motor  coordination  timescale  showed  significant differences (p < 0.05) between the injured and the healthy legs before surgery and after 5 and 21 weeks. The movement coordination test data showed that there the timescale significantly  longer on the injured knee compared with the noninjured knee. After 21 weeks of rehabilitation we found significantly lower (p  < 0.05) values in injured knees compared with the preoperative data. In injured knee the timescale after 21 weeks of rehabilitation was significantly (p < 0.05) longer compared with noninjured knee.The Lysholm questionnaire scale indicated that there was a significant difference in the results for values (p  < 0.05) before surgery and after 21 weeks of rehabilitation. The questionnaire scale data showed that after 21 weeks of rehabilitation results for values was significantly (p < 0.05) highest compared with before surgery and after 5 weeks.Discussion and conclusions. There was improvement in the injured leg in mean motor coordination timescale 21 weeks after ACL reconstruction, but the timescale was higher than in the uninjured leg. After 21 weeks of ACL reconstruction knee functional status in most patients was good or excellent.Keywords: knee joint, the Lysholm questionnaire, movement coordination test.

scholarly journals Poredjenje klinickih rezultata rekonstrukcije prednjeg ukrstenog ligamenta koriscenjem dvaju razlicitih postupaka

2005 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-94
Author(s):  
S. Ninkovic ◽  
D. Savic ◽  
M. Stankovic ◽  
S. Radic ◽  
A. Milicic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Hamstring Tendon ◽  
Patella Tendon ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Golden Standard ◽  
Group A ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Group B ◽  
Hamstrings Tendon

During the last two decades the "golden standard" in reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament knee was the middle third of patellar tendon, but now are more used hamstrings tendon autograft. The aim of this work was to compare our results of the artroscopic reconstruction ACL ( anterior cruciate ligament) of the knee using two different techniques. We were controling 60 patients within the period of two years after operation. Group A was composed of 39 patients which had reconstructed ACL done with bone-patella tendon-bone autografts, in the group B were 21 patients and at them as autographts have been used hamstring tendon. Difference between health and the ill knee by the Lachman?s test after operation, in the group A was 2,4mm , but in the group B was 2,2mm (p> 0,05 ). Postoperative middle value of the Lysholm and Gillquist score in the group A was 97,74, in the group B it was 96,67 (p>0,05). IKDC score results are following: Group A- mark A 32 patients (84,6%); mark B 5 (12,8%); mark C 1 (2,6%) and in the group B: mark A 17 patients (81%); mark B 3 (14,28%): mark C 1 (4,72%) (p> 0,05). Postoperative value for the Tegner and Lyscholm score activity in the A group was 8,23, in B group it was 8,81. The reconstruction of ACL with bone-patella tendon-bone grafts gave better results then the reconstruction with the hamstring tendon only according to Tegner score values. In other parameters between those two groups there was no statistically significant difference.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document