Cargando…

Clinical outcomes in stump-preserving versus stump-sacrificing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND: Anterior Cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) aims to restore the anatomy and function of the knee. Although stump preservation during ACLR could be technically challenging, it may improve the revascularization and proprioceptive function of the graft. In this study, we aimed to...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: El-Desouky, Mahmoud Ahmed, Ezzat, Mostafa, Abdelrazek, Begad Hesham
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9308271/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35870924
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05665-3
_version_ 1784752951092314112
author El-Desouky, Mahmoud Ahmed
Ezzat, Mostafa
Abdelrazek, Begad Hesham
author_facet El-Desouky, Mahmoud Ahmed
Ezzat, Mostafa
Abdelrazek, Begad Hesham
author_sort El-Desouky, Mahmoud Ahmed
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Anterior Cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) aims to restore the anatomy and function of the knee. Although stump preservation during ACLR could be technically challenging, it may improve the revascularization and proprioceptive function of the graft. In this study, we aimed to compare the functional outcome after ACLR with and without stump preservation. METHODS: One hundred and twenty patients with acutely torn ACL and with intact tibial stump were included in this study. Half of them (60 cases) underwent ACLR with stump preservation. The other half (60 cases) had ACLR after total resection of the tibial stump. One hundred and nine out of 120 cases completed their 2 year-follow-up period. All patients were assessed by Tegner activity, Lysholm, and objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores. The side-to-side difference regarding stability was assessed by KT-1000 instrumented Lachman and proprioceptive function was measured by Passive angle reproduction test. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between both groups regarding Tegner activity, Lysholm, and IKDC scores. Knee stability measured by KT-1000 and complication rate also showed no significant difference. But there was a significant difference in proprioception favoring stump preservation. On the other hand, the operative time was significantly shorter with stump resection. There was no significant difference in the complications rate between both groups and there were no cases with stiffness in either group. CONCLUSION: Stump preservation ACLR is a safe technique that yields equivalent functional outcomes to standard ACLR. However; it provides better proprioception. It is more technically challenging, but in experienced hands; it is easily reproducible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number: NCT05364398. 06/05/2022.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9308271
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93082712022-07-24 Clinical outcomes in stump-preserving versus stump-sacrificing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; a randomized controlled study El-Desouky, Mahmoud Ahmed Ezzat, Mostafa Abdelrazek, Begad Hesham BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research BACKGROUND: Anterior Cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) aims to restore the anatomy and function of the knee. Although stump preservation during ACLR could be technically challenging, it may improve the revascularization and proprioceptive function of the graft. In this study, we aimed to compare the functional outcome after ACLR with and without stump preservation. METHODS: One hundred and twenty patients with acutely torn ACL and with intact tibial stump were included in this study. Half of them (60 cases) underwent ACLR with stump preservation. The other half (60 cases) had ACLR after total resection of the tibial stump. One hundred and nine out of 120 cases completed their 2 year-follow-up period. All patients were assessed by Tegner activity, Lysholm, and objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores. The side-to-side difference regarding stability was assessed by KT-1000 instrumented Lachman and proprioceptive function was measured by Passive angle reproduction test. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between both groups regarding Tegner activity, Lysholm, and IKDC scores. Knee stability measured by KT-1000 and complication rate also showed no significant difference. But there was a significant difference in proprioception favoring stump preservation. On the other hand, the operative time was significantly shorter with stump resection. There was no significant difference in the complications rate between both groups and there were no cases with stiffness in either group. CONCLUSION: Stump preservation ACLR is a safe technique that yields equivalent functional outcomes to standard ACLR. However; it provides better proprioception. It is more technically challenging, but in experienced hands; it is easily reproducible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number: NCT05364398. 06/05/2022. BioMed Central 2022-07-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9308271/ /pubmed/35870924 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05665-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
El-Desouky, Mahmoud Ahmed
Ezzat, Mostafa
Abdelrazek, Begad Hesham
Clinical outcomes in stump-preserving versus stump-sacrificing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; a randomized controlled study
title Clinical outcomes in stump-preserving versus stump-sacrificing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; a randomized controlled study
title_full Clinical outcomes in stump-preserving versus stump-sacrificing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; a randomized controlled study
title_fullStr Clinical outcomes in stump-preserving versus stump-sacrificing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; a randomized controlled study
title_full_unstemmed Clinical outcomes in stump-preserving versus stump-sacrificing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; a randomized controlled study
title_short Clinical outcomes in stump-preserving versus stump-sacrificing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; a randomized controlled study
title_sort clinical outcomes in stump-preserving versus stump-sacrificing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; a randomized controlled study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9308271/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35870924
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05665-3
work_keys_str_mv AT eldesoukymahmoudahmed clinicaloutcomesinstumppreservingversusstumpsacrificinganteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionarandomizedcontrolledstudy
AT ezzatmostafa clinicaloutcomesinstumppreservingversusstumpsacrificinganteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionarandomizedcontrolledstudy
AT abdelrazekbegadhesham clinicaloutcomesinstumppreservingversusstumpsacrificinganteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionarandomizedcontrolledstudy