|
|
||||||||
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
|||||||||
,From the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic, Los Angeles, California
Presented at the 27th annual meeting of the AOSSM, Keystone, Colorado, June 2001.
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Clarence L. Shields, Jr., MD, Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic, 6801 Park Terrace Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90045
Background: To date, there has been no publication of clinical follow-up data on patients who have undergone quadrupled hamstring tendon autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bioabsorbable screw fixation.
Purpose: To report the results of quadrupled hamstring tendon autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bioabsorbable interference screw fixation.
Study Design: Retrospective review.
Methods: Sixty-five patients (66 knees) were retrospectively identified by chart review as having undergone quadrupled hamstring tendon autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bioabsorbable interference screw fixation with a minimum 2-year follow-up.
Results: Data were collected on 48 knees in 47 patients (73%) at an average 30.2 months (range, 24 to 43) after surgery. Thirty-six patients (37 knees) returned for clinical evaluation (56% return) and subjective follow-up only was obtained in 11 patients (17%). The mean Lysolm knee score was 91 (range, 45 to 98), with a mean of 97 for the uninvolved knee. The mean Tegner activity score was 5.7 (range, 3 to 7). The KT-1000 arthrometer mean side-to-side difference for manual maximum displacement was 2.03 mm (range, -1 to 8). The mean International Knee Documentation Committee knee score was 83 (range, 47 to 100). Patients who underwent associated partial meniscectomy or meniscal repair had significantly lower International Knee Documentation Committee scores than patients without associated procedures (P < 0.01).
Conclusions: Quadrupled hamstring tendon autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bioabsorbable interference screw fixation is comparable with other methods of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in terms of patient satisfaction, knee stability, and function.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. M. Tuman, D. R. Diduch, L. J. Rubino, J. A. Baumfeld, H. S. Nguyen, and J. M. Hart Predictors for Hamstring Graft Diameter in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Am. J. Sports Med., November 1, 2007; 35(11): 1945 - 1949. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Weiler, A. Schmeling, I. Stohr, M. J. Kaab, and M. Wagner Primary Versus Single-Stage Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Autologous Hamstring Tendon Grafts: A Prospective Matched-Group Analysis Am. J. Sports Med., October 1, 2007; 35(10): 1643 - 1652. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Laxdal, J. Kartus, B. I. Eriksson, E. Faxen, N. Sernert, and J. Karlsson Biodegradable and Metallic Interference Screws in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Surgery Using Hamstring Tendon Grafts: Prospective Randomized Study of Radiographic Results and Clinical Outcome Am. J. Sports Med., October 1, 2006; 34(10): 1574 - 1580. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Wagner, M. J. Kaab, J. Schallock, N. P. Haas, and A. Weiler Hamstring Tendon Versus Patellar Tendon Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Biodegradable Interference Fit Fixation: A Prospective Matched-Group Analysis Am. J. Sports Med., September 1, 2005; 33(9): 1327 - 1336. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |