Cargando…
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?
Surgical reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures has proven to be a highly effective technique that usually provides satisfactory results. However, despite the majority of patients recovering their function after this procedure, ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is still imperfect. To im...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8625610/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34830448 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms222212566 |
_version_ | 1784606463414501376 |
---|---|
author | Rodríguez-Merchán, Emerito Carlos |
author_facet | Rodríguez-Merchán, Emerito Carlos |
author_sort | Rodríguez-Merchán, Emerito Carlos |
collection | PubMed |
description | Surgical reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures has proven to be a highly effective technique that usually provides satisfactory results. However, despite the majority of patients recovering their function after this procedure, ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is still imperfect. To improve these results, various biological augmentation (BA) techniques have been employed mostly in animal models. They include: (1) growth factors (bone morphogenetic protein, epidermal growth factor, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, basic fibroblast growth factor, transforming growth factor-β, hepatocyte growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and platelet concentrates such as platelet-rich plasma, fibrin clot, and autologous conditioned serum), (2) mesenchymal stem cells, (3) autologous tissue, (4) various pharmaceuticals (matrix metalloproteinase-inhibitor alpha-2-macroglobulin bisphosphonates), (5) biophysical/environmental methods (hyperbaric oxygen, low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, extracorporeal shockwave therapy), (6) biomaterials (fixation methods, biological coatings, biosynthetic bone substitutes, osteoconductive materials), and (7) gene therapy. All of them have shown good results in experimental studies; however, the clinical studies on BA published so far are highly heterogeneous and have a low degree of evidence. The most widely used technique to date is platelet-rich plasma. My position is that orthopedic surgeons must be very cautious when considering using PRP or other BA methods in ACLR. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8625610 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86256102021-11-27 Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial? Rodríguez-Merchán, Emerito Carlos Int J Mol Sci Review Surgical reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures has proven to be a highly effective technique that usually provides satisfactory results. However, despite the majority of patients recovering their function after this procedure, ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is still imperfect. To improve these results, various biological augmentation (BA) techniques have been employed mostly in animal models. They include: (1) growth factors (bone morphogenetic protein, epidermal growth factor, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, basic fibroblast growth factor, transforming growth factor-β, hepatocyte growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and platelet concentrates such as platelet-rich plasma, fibrin clot, and autologous conditioned serum), (2) mesenchymal stem cells, (3) autologous tissue, (4) various pharmaceuticals (matrix metalloproteinase-inhibitor alpha-2-macroglobulin bisphosphonates), (5) biophysical/environmental methods (hyperbaric oxygen, low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, extracorporeal shockwave therapy), (6) biomaterials (fixation methods, biological coatings, biosynthetic bone substitutes, osteoconductive materials), and (7) gene therapy. All of them have shown good results in experimental studies; however, the clinical studies on BA published so far are highly heterogeneous and have a low degree of evidence. The most widely used technique to date is platelet-rich plasma. My position is that orthopedic surgeons must be very cautious when considering using PRP or other BA methods in ACLR. MDPI 2021-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8625610/ /pubmed/34830448 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms222212566 Text en © 2021 by the author. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Rodríguez-Merchán, Emerito Carlos Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial? |
title | Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial? |
title_full | Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial? |
title_fullStr | Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial? |
title_full_unstemmed | Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial? |
title_short | Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial? |
title_sort | anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: is biological augmentation beneficial? |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8625610/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34830448 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms222212566 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rodriguezmerchanemeritocarlos anteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionisbiologicalaugmentationbeneficial |