Carlos Almeida-Herdoíza, Eusebio Sánchez-Pérez, Arturo Reyes-Mares, María Maldonado-Vega
{"title":"Resultados de la satisfacción subjetiva y traslación tibial residual entre 3 técnicas de reconstrucción del ligamento cruzado anterior","authors":"Carlos Almeida-Herdoíza, Eusebio Sánchez-Pérez, Arturo Reyes-Mares, María Maldonado-Vega","doi":"10.1016/j.rslaot.2017.02.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>In this study, we aimed to determine if there is any difference between the subjetive satisfaction and the residual tibial traslation outcomes, of the three most common reconstruction techniques; which are conventional trans-tibial technique, anatomic tunnel technique and all inside technique.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Observational, retrospective study of eigthteen patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between 2014 and 2015. Single-bundle reconstruction with an autologous or allograft was performed in all patients. Femoral tunnel was drilled by the conventional TT technique in 6 patients, Anatomic in 6 patients and all inside in 6. Functional evaluation was performed about 6 months postoperatively. Functional evaluation included the International Knee Documentation Committee Scoring Subjetive form (IKDC) and anteroposterior stability was assessed using a arthrometer in lachman test and anterior drawer test.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The results of IKDC subjetive test and residual ligament laxity, demonstrated statistical diference between Transtibial (IKDC 70.52) vs all inside technique (IKDC 89.63) <em>(P</em>0.05).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The all inside preparation technique in the reconstruction of the ACL seems as effective as the conventional techniques in terms of subjetive satisfaction and stability in the midterm of follow up.</p><p>Level of evidence: IV.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101114,"journal":{"name":"Revista Latinoamericana de Cirugía Ortopédica","volume":"1 3","pages":"Pages 83-87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rslaot.2017.02.007","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Latinoamericana de Cirugía Ortopédica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444972517300098","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
In this study, we aimed to determine if there is any difference between the subjetive satisfaction and the residual tibial traslation outcomes, of the three most common reconstruction techniques; which are conventional trans-tibial technique, anatomic tunnel technique and all inside technique.
Material and methods
Observational, retrospective study of eigthteen patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between 2014 and 2015. Single-bundle reconstruction with an autologous or allograft was performed in all patients. Femoral tunnel was drilled by the conventional TT technique in 6 patients, Anatomic in 6 patients and all inside in 6. Functional evaluation was performed about 6 months postoperatively. Functional evaluation included the International Knee Documentation Committee Scoring Subjetive form (IKDC) and anteroposterior stability was assessed using a arthrometer in lachman test and anterior drawer test.
Results
The results of IKDC subjetive test and residual ligament laxity, demonstrated statistical diference between Transtibial (IKDC 70.52) vs all inside technique (IKDC 89.63) (P0.05).
Conclusion
The all inside preparation technique in the reconstruction of the ACL seems as effective as the conventional techniques in terms of subjetive satisfaction and stability in the midterm of follow up.