PDF herunterladen
CC BY 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2024; 59(06): e868-e875
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1785663
Artigo Original
Joelho

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with Internal Brace Augmentation Results in Fewer Reruptures Compared to Reconstruction without Augmentation

Artikel in mehreren Sprachen: português | English
João Victor Novaretti 
1   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Centro de Ortopedia e Traumatologia do Esporte, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
,
Claudio Paula Pessoa Dias Junior 
2   Instituto Cohen, São Paulo, Brasil
,
Lucas Santos Lima 
2   Instituto Cohen, São Paulo, Brasil
,
Joicemar Tarouco Amaro 
2   Instituto Cohen, São Paulo, Brasil
,
Daniel Esperante Gomes 
1   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Centro de Ortopedia e Traumatologia do Esporte, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
,
Moises Cohen 
3   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
› Institutsangaben

Financial Support The authors declare that they did not receive funding from agencies in the public, private, or not-for-profit sectors for the conduction of the present study.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
  Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective To compare the clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using autografts with and without internal brace augmentation.

Methods Data from patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with hamstring and quadriceps tendon autografts, with a minimum follow-up of one year, with or without internal brace augmentation were collected prospectively analyzed retrospectively. The Lysholm and Tegner functional scores were collected before and after surgery, as well as data on postoperative complications. For the comparison of means of the two groups, we used the Student t test or the Mann-Whitney non-parametric test, when the assumption of normality of the data was rejected.

Results In total, 55 patients underwent ACL reconstruction with internal brace augmentation and another 55 patients underwent ACL reconstruction without internal brace augmentation. The patients were aged between 16 and 63 years (mean of 32.7 ± 11.4 years). A total of 62 patients (56.4%) underwent ACL reconstruction with hamstring graft, and 19 patients (17.3%), with quadriceps tendon graft, with a diameter variation of 7 mm to 11 mm (mean of 8.95 ± 0.83 mm). The postoperative scores did not differ between the groups (p > 0.05). Regarding the group submitted to ACL reconstruction with internal brace augmentation, 4 patients had complications: @ cases of arthrofibrosis, 2 (3.7%); 1 case of rerupture (1.8%); and 1 case of thrombosis (1.8%). In the group submitted to ACL reconstruction without augmentation, 7 patients manifested complications: 2 cases of arthrofibrosis (3.9%); 4 cases of rerupture (7.3%); and 1 case of infection (2%).

Conclusion The results of the present study show that fewer cases of ACL rerupture were observed after reconstruction with internal brace augmentation when compared with ACL reconstruction without augmentation, although no differences in functional scores were found.

Keywords

anterior cruciate ligament - anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction - knee injuries - treatment outcome

Work carried out at the Sports Orthopedics and Traumatology Center, Departament of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 17. Juli 2023

Angenommen: 06. November 2023

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
21. Dezember 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Gföller P, Abermann E, Runer A. et al. Non-operative treatment of ACL injury is associated with opposing subjective and objective outcomes over 20 years of follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2019; 27 (08) 2665-2671
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Mai HT, Chun DS, Schneider AD. et al. Performance-based outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in professional athletes differ between sports. Am J Sports Med 2017; 45 (10) 2226-2232
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Paterno MV, Rauh MJ, Schmitt LC, Ford KR, Hewett TE. Incidence of contralateral and ipsilateral anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury after primary ACL reconstruction and return to sport. Clin J Sport Med 2012; 22 (02) 116-121
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Nwachukwu BU, Voleti PB, Berkanish P. et al. Return to play and patient satisfaction after ACL reconstruction: Study with minimum 2-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017; 99 (09) 720-725
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Arnoczky SP, Tarvin GB, Marshall JL. Anterior cruciate ligament replacement using patellar tendon. An evaluation of graft revascularization in the dog. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1982; 64 (02) 217-224
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Gans I, Retzky JS, Jones LC, Tanaka MJ. Epidemiology of Recurrent Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries in National Collegiate Athletic Association Sports: The Injury Surveillance Program, 2004-2014. Orthop J Sports Med 2018; 6 (06) 2325967118777823
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Chen JL, Allen CR, Stephens TE. et al; Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) Group. Differences in mechanisms of failure, intraoperative findings, and surgical characteristics between single- and multiple-revision ACL reconstructions: a MARS cohort study. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41 (07) 1571-1578
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Clancy Jr WG, Narechania RG, Rosenberg TD, Gmeiner JG, Wisnefske DD, Lange TA. Anterior and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in rhesus monkeys. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1981; 63 (08) 1270-1284
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Shelbourne KD, Nitz P. Accelerated rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 1990; 18 (03) 292-299
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Gilmer BB, Crall T, DeLong J, Kubo T, Mackay G, Jani SS. Biomechanical analysis of internal bracing for treatment of medial knee injuries. Orthopedics 2016; 39 (03) e532-e537
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Whelan D, Leiter J, Sasyniuk T. et al. Double-row repair of the distal attachment of the superficial medial collateral ligament: a basic science pilot study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2015; 23 (10) 2820-2824
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Lubowitz JH, MacKay G, Gilmer B. Knee medial collateral ligament and posteromedial corner anatomic repair with internal bracing. Arthrosc Tech 2014; 3 (04) e505-e508
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Lee KW, Yang DS, Lee GS, Choy WS. Suture Bridge fixation technique for posterior cruciate ligament avulsion fracture. Clin Orthop Surg 2015; 7 (04) 505-508
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Witt BL, Hyer CF. Achilles tendon reattachment after surgical treatment of insertional tendinosis using the suture bridge technique: a case series. J Foot Ankle Surg 2012; 51 (04) 487-493
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Cho BK, Park KJ, Kim SW, Lee HJ, Choi SM. Minimal invasive suture-tape augmentation for chronic ankle instability. Foot Ankle Int 2015; 36 (11) 1330-1338
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Dugas JR, Walters BL, Beason DP, Fleisig GS, Chronister JE. Biomechanical comparison of ulnar collateral ligament repair with internal bracing versus modified Jobe reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 2016; 44 (03) 735-741
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Heusdens CHW, Zazulia K, Roelant E. et al. Study protocol: a single-blind, multi-center, randomized controlled trial comparing dynamic intraligamentary stabilization, internal brace ligament augmentation and reconstruction in individuals with an acute anterior cruciate ligament rupture: LIBRƎ study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2019; 20 (01) 547
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Lubowitz JH. All-inside anterior cruciate ligament graft link: graft preparation technique. Arthrosc Tech 2012; 1 (02) e165-e168
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Smith PA, Bley JA. Allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction utilizing internal brace augmentation. Arthrosc Tech 2016; 5 (05) e1143-e1147
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Bachmaier S, Smith PA, Bley J, Wijdicks CA. Independent suture tape reinforcement of small and standard diameter grafts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A biomechanical full construct model. Arthroscopy 2018; 34 (02) 490-499
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 De Smet E, Heusdens CHW, Parizel PM, Van Dyck P. MRI following primary repair of the anterior cruciate ligament. Clin Radiol 2019; 74 (08) 649.e1-649.e10
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Irfan A, Kerr S, Hopper G, Wilson W, Wilson L, Mackay G. A Criterion Based Rehabilitation Protocol for ACL Repair with Internal Brace Augmentation. Int J Sports Phys Ther 2021; 16 (03) 870-878
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Bottoni CR, Smith EL, Shaha J. et al. Autograft versus allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A prospective, randomized clinical study with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 2015; 43 (10) 2501-2509
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Bodendorfer BM, Michaelson EM, Shu HT. et al. Suture Augmented Versus Standard Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Matched Comparative Analysis. Arthroscopy 2019; 35 (07) 2114-2122
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 Cook JL, Smith P, Stannard JP. et al. A canine arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model for study of synthetic augmentation of tendon allografts. J Knee Surg 2017; 30 (07) 704-711
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Batty LM, Norsworthy CJ, Lash NJ, Wasiak J, Richmond AK, Feller JA. Synthetic devices for reconstructive surgery of the cruciate ligaments: a systematic review. Arthroscopy 2015; 31 (05) 957-968
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 Schuster P, Schulz M, Immendoerfer M, Mayer P, Schlumberger M, Richter J. Septic arthritis after arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Evaluation of an arthroscopic graft-retaining treatment protocol. Am J Sports Med 2015; 43 (12) 3005-3012
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 28 Gomes JLE, Marczyk LRS. Complicações pré e pós operatórias nas reconstruções ligamentares. Clin Ortop 2000; 3: 669-673
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 29 Janssen RP, Reijman M, Janssen DM, van Mourik JB. Arterial complications, venous thromboembolism and deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review. World J Orthop 2016; 7 (09) 604-617
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Kraus Schmitz J, Lindgren V, Janarv PM, Forssblad M, Stålman A. Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: incidence, outcome, and risk factors. Bone Joint J 2019; 101-B (01) 34-40
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar