Abstract
Background: The current standard of treatment of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is reconstruction (ACLR). This technique has some disadvantages: poor proprioception, donor site morbidity and the inability to restore joint kinematics. ACL repair could be an alternative treatment. The purpose of the study was to compare the stability and the function after ACL primary repair versus single-bundle ACLR. Methods: In a retrospective study, 12 patients underwent primary ACL repair with internal bracing, 15 patients underwent standard ACLR. Follow-up examinations were evaluated at up to 2 years postoperatively. One patient in the ACL repair group was lost to follow-up due to re-rupture. The absolute value of anterior tibial translation (ATT) and the side-to-side difference in the same patient (ΔATT) were evaluated using the GNRB arthrometer. The Lysholm knee scoring was obtained. Re-ruptures and other complications were recorded. Results: Anterior tibial translation (ATT) was significantly decreased in the ACL repair group compared with the ACLR group (5.31 mm vs. 7.18 mm, respectively; p = 0.0137). Arthrometric measurements demonstrated a mean side-to-side difference (ΔATT) 1.87 (range 0.2 to 4.9) mm significantly decreased compared to ACLR 3.36 (range 1.2–5.6 mm; p = 0.0107). The mean Lysholm score was 85.3 points in the ACL repair group and 89.9 in ACLR group. No significant differences between ACL repair and ACLR were found for the Lysholm score. There was no association between AP laxity and clinical outcomes. There were two complications in the internal bracing group: one patient had re-rupture and was treated by ACLR, another had limited extension and had arthroscopic debridement. Conclusions: Anterior tibial translation was significantly decreased after ACL repair. Additionally, the functional results after ACL repair with internal bracing were comparable with those after ACLR. It should be noted that the two complications occurred. The current study supports further development of ACL repair techniques.
Highlights
Responsible for controlling anterior–posterior (AP) and rotatory knee laxity, the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is the major knee joint stabilizer
The average time from surgery to follow-up in the ACL repair with additional internal bracing group was 14.8 months and for patients treated with ACL reconstruction (ACLR), 13.6 months
Anterior tibial translation (ATT) was significantly decreased in the ACL repair group compared with the ACLR group (5.31 mm vs. 7.18 mm; p = 0.0137) (Figure 4)
Summary
Responsible for controlling anterior–posterior (AP) and rotatory knee laxity, the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is the major knee joint stabilizer. Due to the limited healing potential of the ligament, ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is the gold standard in ACL injury treatment [1]. The administration of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), which comprises growth factors and displays evident biological activity [2,3], showed promise in stimulating ACL healing. Improved patient selection and the latest advances in arthroscopic techniques, such as internal bracing, have aroused renewed interest in ACL repair [6,7,8,9]. These methods offer potential advantages, including native ACL preservation, reduced proprioception loss and no autologous graft harvesting-associated morbidity
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
