4.0 Article

Comparison of functional outcomes of two anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction methods with hamstring tendon graft

Journal

ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA ET TRAUMATOLOGICA TURCICA
Volume 45, Issue 4, Pages 240-247

Publisher

TURKISH ASSOC ORTHOPAEDICS TRAUMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.3944/AOTT.2011.2402

Keywords

Anterior cruciate ligament; Endobutton; hamstring graft; TransFix

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of Endobutton post-fixation and femoral (TransFix) transfixation in ACL reconstruction on lower extremity muscle strength, joint position sense, and knee stability. Methods: Subjects who had undergone ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon using Endobutton post-fixation (n=20, mean age: 26.5 years) or femoral transfixation (n=20, mean age: 29.9 years) were recruited to an ACL rehabilitation program. Twelve months after surgery, quadriceps and hamstring torque values were recorded using an isokinetic dynamometer. Computerized coordination and proprioception tests (Functional Squat System; Monitored Rehab System) were performed to determine the deficits in joint position sense. The anterior translation test was performed using a Kneelax 3 arthrometer to determine knee laxity. Results: Side-to-side differences between groups for hamstring and quadriceps muscle strength, concentric and eccentric motor coordination and anterior tibial laxity were not significantly different (p>0.05). Conclusion: No statistically significant differences in functional outcome were found 1 year after the ACL reconstruction using Endobutton post-fixation and femoral transfixation with hamstring tendon graft. Deficits in hamstring-quadriceps muscle strength, motor coordination and proprioception were still found in both groups. We therefore recommend that long-term follow-up and rehabilitation including neuromuscular exercises should be continued for longer than one year after ACL reconstruction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available