Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Single- versus Double-bundle ACL Reconstruction: Is There Any Difference in Stability and Function at 3-year Followup?
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Single- versus Double-bundle ACL Reconstruction: Is There Any Difference in Stability and Function at 3-year Followup?
Do you wish to request the book?
Single- versus Double-bundle ACL Reconstruction: Is There Any Difference in Stability and Function at 3-year Followup?
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Single- versus Double-bundle ACL Reconstruction: Is There Any Difference in Stability and Function at 3-year Followup?
2012
Overview
Background
Despite a number of studies comparing postoperative stability and function after anatomic double-bundle and single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), it remains unclear whether double-bundle reconstruction improves stability or function.
Questions/purposes
We therefore asked whether patients having single- and double-bundle ACLR using semitendinosus (ST) alone differed with regard to (1) postoperative stability; (2) ROM; and (3) five functional scores.
Methods
We prospectively followed 60 patients with an isolated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Thirty patients underwent single-bundle and 30 patients underwent double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Clinically we assessed stability and range of motion (ROM); anteroposterior stability was assessed by Rolimeter and rotational stability by a pivot shift test. Function was assessed by IKDC, Noyes, Lysholm, Marx, and Tegner activity scales. The minimum followup was 36 months (mean, 46.2 months; range, 36–60 months).
Results
Residual anteroposterior laxity at 3 years postoperatively was similar in both groups: 1.4 ± 0.3 mm versus 1.4 ± 0.2 mm, respectively. We observed no difference in the pivot shift test. ROM was similar in both groups, although double-bundle patients required more physical therapy sessions to gain full ROM. IKDC, Noyes, Lysholm, Marx, and Tegner scores were similar at final followup.
Conclusion
Double-bundle reconstruction of the ACL did not improve function or stability compared with single-bundle reconstruction.
Level of Evidence
Level II, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Publisher
Springer-Verlag,Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Ovid Technologies
Subject
/ Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries
/ Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction - methods
/ Athletic Injuries - physiopathology
/ Athletic Injuries - rehabilitation
/ Female
/ Humans
/ Knee
/ Knee Injuries - physiopathology
/ Knee Injuries - rehabilitation
/ Knee Joint - physiopathology
/ Male
/ Medicine
/ Rupture
/ Surgery
