Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction / Journal articles

Journal articles on the topic 'Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction'

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Author: Grafiati

Published: 4 June 2021

Last updated: 7 July 2024

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

Wilde, Jeffrey, Asheesh Bedi, and David W. Altchek. "Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach 6, no. 6 (August 20, 2013): 504–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1941738113500910.

Full text

Abstract:

Context: Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is one of the most common surgical procedures, with more than 200,000 ACL tears occurring annually. Although primary ACL reconstruction is a successful operation, success rates still range from 75% to 97%. Consequently, several thousand revision ACL reconstructions are performed annually and are unfortunately associated with inferior clinical outcomes when compared with primary reconstructions. Evidence Acquisition: Data were obtained from peer-reviewed literature through a search of the PubMed database (1988-2013) as well as from textbook chapters and surgical technique papers. Study Design: Clinical review. Level of Evidence: Level 4. Results: The clinical outcomes after revision ACL reconstruction are largely based on level IV case series. Much of the existing literature is heterogenous with regard to patient populations, primary and revision surgical techniques, concomitant ligamentous injuries, and additional procedures performed at the time of the revision, which limits generalizability. Nevertheless, there is a general consensus that the outcomes for revision ACL reconstruction are inferior to primary reconstruction. Conclusion: Excellent results can be achieved with regard to graft stability, return to play, and functional knee instability but are generally inferior to primary ACL reconstruction. A staged approach with autograft reconstruction is recommended in any circumstance in which a single-stage approach results in suboptimal graft selection, tunnel position, graft fixation, or biological milieu for tendon-bone healing. Strength-of-Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT): Good results may still be achieved with regard to graft stability, return to play, and functional knee instability, but results are generally inferior to primary ACL reconstruction: Level B.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Seedhom, B. B. "Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament." Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine 206, no. 1 (March 1992): 15–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1243/pime_proc_1992_206_257_02.

Full text

Abstract:

Ligaments are strong collagenous structures that act as constraints on joint motion, thus confining the articular surfaces to more or less the same paths. In so doing they prevent arbitrary apposition of these surfaces from occurring and resulting in abnormal stresses which may damage the joint surfaces. Ligaments rupture due to excessive loads, particularly those resulting from trauma occurring during sporting events or motor vehicle accidents. Knee and ankle joints have the highest frequency of ligamentous injuries. This paper is a brief review of the current approaches to the reconstruction of the knee ligaments with specific reference to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) being the most frequently reconstructed. This is not only because it is frequently injured but also because of the debilitating consequences of such an injury. Approaches ranging from the conservative to those that advocate the use of frank prosthetic replacement have been adopted by surgeons at both ends of the spectrum. Following a discussion of the rationale for reconstruction of the ACL, the mechanical and biological considerations of the reconstructive procedure are discussed. The different methods of ACL reconstruction are reviewed. These include: (a) primary repair, (b) reconstruction with different tissues, including autogenous allografts and xenografts, (c) reconstruction employing different synthetic devices. A brief discussion of the procedures used for reconstruction with different types of tissue and of the surviving examples of the synthetic devices will follow.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Denti, Matteo, Dario Lo Vetere, Corrado Bait, Herbert Schönhuber, Gianluca Melegati, and Piero Volpi. "Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." American Journal of Sports Medicine 36, no. 10 (June 20, 2008): 1896–902. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546506318189.

Full text

Abstract:

Background Revision of an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is a complicated and delicate clinical procedure whose results, theoretically, are less satisfactory than those of the first operation. Hypothesis The outcome of a revised anterior cruciate ligament surgery is comparable to primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, with a rate of success around 70% to 80%. Study Design Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods A total of 66 revisions of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions were carried out from September 2000 to September 2004. Patients with concomitant instability and those with alterations in the weightbearing axis of the lower limbs were not included. Sixty patients were followed from 24 to 72 months: 50 clinically and 10 by a phone interview. Six patients were lost to follow-up due to changes of address. Results Lysholm scores were 57% excellent (95–100 points), 13% good (84–94 points), 22% fair (63–83 points), and 8% poor (<64 points). A total of 68% of patients had negative Lachman tests, 20% had positive tests with a hard end point, 10% had positive results, and 2% had very positive results. Stabilometric evaluation with the KT-1000 arthrometer at the maximum load showed that 56% of patients had <3 mm side-to-side difference, 34% had between 3 and 5 mm, and 10% had 6 to 10 mm. The International Knee Documentation Committee scores were 36% excellent (class A), 46% good (class B), and 18% fair (class C). The percentage of patients who resumed sport at the same level was 78%, compared with 58% after their primary reconstruction. Conclusion The results of these anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction revision surgeries are close to those achieved by other series of primary reconstructions with a little less satisfactory results. We attribute the high success rate to the strict application of the same technique and the confinement of revision to motivated patients. It should be noted, however, that follow-up is only at the midterm stage (mean, 41.9 months).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Arcuri, Francisco, Fernando Barclay, and Ivan Nacul. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine 2, no. 12_suppl4 (December 1, 2014): 2325967114S0023. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967114s00231.

Full text

Abstract:

Introduction: The most recent advances in ACL reconstruction try to reproduce the anatomic femoral and tibial footprints as close as possible. Creating independent tunnels would allow an optimal of the entry point and the femoral tunnel obliquity, and together with an adequate reamer diameter they wouldreproduce with greater certainty the anatomy. Objective: To compare the radiographic parameters of the femoral and tibial tunnel positions in two groups of patients, one operated with a transtibial and other with transportal anatomic techniques. Materials and Methods: From December 2012 to December 2013, 59 patients with a primary ACL reconstruction divided in two groups, a trans tibial technique (TT), 19 patients, and an transportal one (TP) with 40 patients were prospectively evaluated with AP and lateral X-rays. The femoral tunnel angle, the insertion site with respect of the Blumensaat line, the trans osseous distance, the tibial tunnel position as a percentage of the tibial plateau in the AP and lateral views. And finally the tibial tunnel angle in the AP and Lateral views. Results: The femoral tunnel angle was in the TP group of 45,92º and in the TT one 24,53º, p 0,002. The insertion site percentage of the Blumensaat line was of 20,96 in TP and 20,74 in the TT, p 0,681.Trans osseous distance was in the TP of 3,43 cm and in the TT of 4,79 cm, p <0,000. The tibial tunnel position as a percentage in the AP tibial plateau was of 44,35 in TP and of 40,80 TT with a p of 0,076. The tibial tunnel position as a percentage of the lateral tibial plateau was of 28,70 in TP and 34,53 in TT with a p 0,367. Tibial tunnel angle in the AP was of 73,48º in TP and 62,81 in TT with a p of 0,002, and in the lateral plateau of 114,69º in TP and 112,79º in TT with a p of 0,427. Conclusion: It is possible to create tibial and femoral tunnel in optimal positions but not equal between both groups. Creating independent tunnels allow a more anterior and vertical tibial tunnel allowing a better coverage of the tibial footprint. A transportal femoral tunnel would allow a better inclination angle and a lesser trans-osseous distance, technical details that would allow a better coverage of the femoral footprint.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Romano, Victor M., Ben K. Graf, James S. Keene, and Richard H. Lange. "Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction." American Journal of Sports Medicine 21, no. 3 (May 1993): 415–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/036354659302100315.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Aglietti, Paolo, Francesco Giron, Roberto Buzzi, Flavio Biddau, and Francesco Sasso. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery 86, no. 10 (October 2004): 2143–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200410000-00004.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Fox, Anna E., and David S. Johnson. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume 87, no. 8 (August 2005): 1882–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200508000-00033.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Giron, Francesco. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume 87, no. 8 (August 2005): 1883. http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200508000-00034.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Meisterling, Steven W., Robert J. Schoderbek, and James R. Andrews. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Operative Techniques in Sports Medicine 17, no. 1 (January 2009): 2–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.otsm.2009.02.003.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Anderson, Allen F., Robert B. Snyder, and A. Brant Lipscomb. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." American Journal of Sports Medicine 29, no. 3 (May 2001): 272–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/03635465010290030201.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Irarrázaval, Sebastián, Masahiro Kurosaka, Moises Cohen, and Freddie H. Fu. "Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction." Journal of ISAKOS: Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports Medicine 1, no. 1 (January 2016): 38–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jisakos-2015-000001.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Gill, Thomas J., and J. Richard Steadman. "Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction." Orthopedic Clinics of North America 33, no. 4 (October 2002): 727–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0030-5898(02)00030-5.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Gladstone, James N., and James R. Andrews. "Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction." Orthopedic Clinics of North America 33, no. 4 (October 2002): ix—x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0030-5898(02)00032-9.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Uzor, Robert B., and Johnny U. V. Monu. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Contemporary Diagnostic Radiology 37, no. 14 (July 2014): 1–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.cdr.0000451582.15064.72.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Bach, Bernard R., and Cynthia L. Boonos. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." AORN Journal 74, no. 2 (August 2001): 151–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0001-2092(06)61524-x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

DiStefano, Vincent. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Clinics in Sports Medicine 12, no. 1 (January 1993): 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0278-5919(20)30454-3.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Piasecki, Dana P., Bernard R. Bach, Alejandro A. Espinoza Orias, and Nikhil N. Verma. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." American Journal of Sports Medicine 39, no. 6 (February 18, 2011): 1306–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546510397170.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Dandy, D. J., and J. L. Hobby. "ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION." Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume 80-B, no. 2 (March 1998): 189–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.80b2.0800189.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Richmond, John C. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Review 26, no. 4 (December 2018): 165–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/jsa.0000000000000218.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Han, Hyuk Soo, Sang Cheol Seong, Sahnghoon Lee, and Myung Chul Lee. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 466, no. 1 (January 2008): 198–204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-007-0015-4.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Wiktor, Łukasz. "Pediatric Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Ortopedia Traumatologia Rehabilitacja 25, no. 4 (August 31, 2023): 219–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0053.9348.

Full text

Abstract:

The incidence of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries in children and adolescents has been growing recently. This problem is a challenge for the treating orthopedic surgeon, especially when the patient is in the prepubertal period with a high growth potential. Since reconstructive procedures require interventions close to active growth plates, they are associated with the risk of postoperative limb length discrepancies and limb deformities. Postponing ACL reconstruction until the end of growth is not a solution, as persistent knee instability increases the risk of secondary intra-articular damage. The key to success is not only knowledge of the anatomy and biomechanics of the pediatric knee but also the ability to predict the remaining growth potential and familiarity with a wide range of reconstructive surgical procedures available for patients at different ages.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Gadikota, Hemanth R., Jong Keun Seon, Michal Kozanek, Luke S. Oh, Thomas J. Gill, Kenneth D. Montgomery, and Guoan Li. "Biomechanical Comparison of Single-Tunnel—Double-Bundle and Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions." American Journal of Sports Medicine 37, no. 5 (March 4, 2009): 962–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546508330145.

Full text

Abstract:

Background Anatomic double-bundle reconstruction has been thought to better simulate the anterior cruciate ligament anatomy. It is, however, a technically challenging procedure, associated with longer operation time and higher cost. Hypothesis Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a single femoral and tibial tunnel can closely reproduce intact knee kinematics. Study Design Controlled laboratory study. Methods Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric knee specimens were tested using a robotic testing system to investigate the kinematic response of the knee joint under an anterior tibial load (130 N), simulated quadriceps load (400 N), and combined torques (5 N·m valgus and 5 N·m internal tibial torques) at 0°, 15°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion. Each knee was tested sequentially under 4 conditions: (1) anterior cruciate ligament intact, (2) anterior cruciate ligament deficient, (3) single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using quadrupled hamstring tendon, and (4) single-tunnel—double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the same tunnels and quadrupled hamstring tendon graft as in the single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Results Single-tunnel—double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction more closely restored the intact knee kinematics than single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at low flexion angles (≤30°) under the anterior tibial load and simulated muscle load (P < .05). However, single-tunnel—double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction overconstrained the knee joint at high flexion angles (≥60°) under the anterior tibial load and at 0° and 30° of flexion under combined torques. Conclusion This double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a single tunnel can better restore anterior tibial translations to the intact level compared with single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at low flexion angles, but it overconstrained the knee joint at high flexion angles. Clinical Relevance This technique could be an alternative for both single-bundle and double-tunnel—double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions to reproduce intact knee kinematics and native anterior cruciate ligament anatomy.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Chen, Tie-Zhu, Yi-Sheng Wang, and Xiao-Sheng Li. "Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using an anterior cruciate ligament stump." Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques 14, no. 3 (2019): 461–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2019.81305.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Wright, Rick W., Warren R. Dunn, Annunziato Amendola, Jack T. Andrish, John Bergfeld, Christopher C. Kaeding, Robert G. Marx, et al. "Risk of Tearing the Intact Anterior Cruciate Ligament in the Contralateral Knee and Rupturing the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Graft during the First 2 Years after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." American Journal of Sports Medicine 35, no. 7 (July 2007): 1131–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546507301318.

Full text

Abstract:

Background The risk of tear of the intact anterior cruciate ligament in the contralateral knee after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction of the opposite knee and the incidence of rupturing the anterior cruciate ligament graft during the first 2 years after surgery have not been extensively studied in a prospective manner. Clinicians have hypothesized that the opposite normal knee is at equal or increased risk compared with the risk of anterior cruciate ligament graft rupture in the operated knee. Hypothesis The risk of anterior cruciate ligament graft rupture and contralateral normal knee anterior cruciate ligament rupture at 2-year follow-up is equal. Study Design Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods The Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcome Network (MOON) database of a prospective longitudinal cohort of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions was used to determine the number of anterior cruciate ligament graft ruptures and tears of the intact anterior cruciate ligament in the contralateral knee at 2-year follow-up. Two-year follow-up consisted of a phone interview and review of operative reports. Results Two-year data were obtained for 235 of 273 patients (86%). There were 14 ligament disruptions. Of these, 7 were tears of the intact anterior cruciate ligament in the contralateral knee (3.0%) and 7 were anterior cruciate ligament graft failures (3.0%). Conclusion The contralateral normal knee anterior cruciate ligament is at a similar risk of anterior cruciate ligament tear (3.0%) as the anterior cruciate ligament graft after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (3.0%).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Shimizu, Sadanori, Tsuyoshi Nagase, Tomohiko Tateishi, Teruhiko Nakagawa, and Masamitsu Tsuchiya. "Second Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Professional Sumo Wrestlers: A Case Series." Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine 8, no. 2 (February 1, 2020): 232596712090369. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967120903698.

Full text

Abstract:

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is one of the most common traumatic injuries in professional sumo wrestlers. Further, ipsilateral reinjuries or contralateral ACL injuries after ACL reconstruction can occur in sumo wrestlers. The incidence of ipsilateral reinjury and contralateral ACL injury after ACL reconstruction ranges from 3% to 13% in a healthy athletic population. Purpose: To investigate the current status of second ACL injuries after ACL reconstruction in sumo wrestlers. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Between 1988 and 2015, a total of 139 primary ACL reconstructions were performed in professional sumo wrestlers at our hospital. After exclusion of cases of multiple ligament knee reconstruction and patients in whom the contralateral ACL had been injured previously, 110 cases were included in this study. We investigated the number of second injuries, time from primary reconstruction to second injury, treatment method, and change in official sumo ranking after second injuries. The chi-square test, Student t test, and Fisher exact text were used for statistical analysis. Results: Among 110 wrestlers who underwent ACL reconstruction, second injuries after primary ACL reconstruction occurred in 22 cases (20.0%). Among them, 14 cases (12.7%) entailed ipsilateral reinjury, 11 (10.0%) entailed contralateral injury, and 3 involved combined rerupture and contralateral injury. As for surgical treatment, 5 revision ACL reconstructions were performed for ipsilateral reinjury (35.7%), and 7 ACL reconstructions were performed for contralateral injury (63.6%). Surgical treatment was not performed for the remaining cases. Wrestlers who were treated by revision or contralateral ACL reconstruction after the second injury were demoted in rank for 3 to 4 tournaments but overtook the nonoperative treatment group in ranking by 2 years postoperatively; all athletes initially were demoted in rank after the second injury. Conclusion: This study is the first to investigate instances of ipsilateral reinjuries and contralateral ACL injuries after ACL reconstruction in professional athletes in heavyweight combat sports. The incidences of ipsilateral reinjury and contralateral ACL injury after ACL reconstruction in professional sumo wrestlers were relatively higher than those reported in previous studies.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

JIAO, Chen, Ying-fang AO, Ping LIU, Xing XIE, Chen LIU, and Yong MA. "Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the bone-posterior cruciate ligament-bone allograft." Chinese Medical Journal 126, no. 4 (February 20, 2013): 674–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0366-6999.20111738.

Full text

Abstract:

Background Allografts were widely used in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction for patients with ACL rupture of the knee. This study was to approve the feasibility of bone-posterior cruciate ligament-bone (BPCLB) allograft transplantation in ACL reconstruction. Methods Eight patients underwent ACL reconstructions with BPCLB allografts and were followed up for an average period of 32 months after operation. Results Subjective parameters including International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), modified Larson knee ligament, Lysholm, and Tegner rating scales were much improved and side to side KT-2000 arthrometer difference was much less postoperatively. Pivot shift test was negative in all patients. The reconstructed ACL had satisfactory shape and tension. Conclusions BPCLB allograft is an optional choice for ACL reconstruction.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Atwi, Hamza, Younes Abbes, Ali Mansour, Khodor Haidar Hassan, and Hassan Karaki. "EVALUATION OF REHABILITATION PARAMETERS AFTER ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION." International Journal of Physiotherapy and Research 5, no. 3 (June 11, 2017): 2119–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijpr.2017.156.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Owens, Brett D., and Mars Group. "Tunnel Bone Grafting in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine 6, no. 7_suppl4 (July 1, 2018): 2325967118S0013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967118s00138.

Full text

Abstract:

Objectives: Bone grafting of lytic or malpositioned tunnels may be required in ACL revision reconstructive surgery. Little is known of the characteristics of these patients and the impact of this practice on the results following revision ACL reconstruction (rACLR). The purpose of this study was to report the differences in preoperative characteristics, surgical assessment, and 2-year outcomes for rACLR patients undergoing tunnel bone grafting procedures. Methods: 1205 patients who underwent rACLR were enrolled in the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) consortium between 2006 and 2011, comprising the prospective cohort. Two-year questionnaire follow-up was obtained on 989 (82%), while telephone follow-up was obtained on 1112 (92%). Subjects undergoing previous or concurrent bone grafting of ACL tunnels were compared with subjects without tunnel grafting. Group characteristics were compared using chi-squared and ANOVA statistical analyses. Results: At total of 158 subjects (13%) underwent tunnel grafting procedures compared to 1,047 who did not. Of these, 95 underwent prior staged bone grafting and 63 underwent concomitant bone grafting. Femoral bone grafting was performed on 31 subjects, tibial grafting in 39, and combined grafting in 88. Significant differences were noted in baseline patient reported outcomes (KOOS sports/recreation, KOOS QOL, and Marx activity) favoring the control group. Significant differences were noted in the number of prior ACL reconstructions, prior graft type, prior femoral fixation method, prior femoral and tibial tunnel locations between the two groups. Significant differences were also noted in the current choice of ACL revision reconstruction technique including graft selection, method of femoral tunnel drilling, femoral fixation, tibial fixation and aperture assessment. Both femoral and tibial bone quality was deemed to be abnormal in 20% of revision surgeries in the bone graft group, compared with 6 and 7% in control group (both p<0.001). Two-year patient reported outcomes were inferior in the bone graft group (KOOS sports/recreation, KOOS QOL, and Marx activity). Conclusion: Tunnel bone grafting was performed in 13% of ACL revision patients. These patients had inferior baseline and 2-year patient reported outcomes and activity levels compared to patients not undergoing bone grafting.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Jari, Sanjiv, and K. Donald Shelbourne. "Simultaneous Bilateral Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." American Journal of Sports Medicine 30, no. 6 (November 2002): 891–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/03635465020300062201.

Full text

Abstract:

Background There are no reports on the outcome of bilateral simultaneous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Hypothesis There is no difference in outcome between unilateral and simultaneous bilateral operations. Study Design Case control study. Methods We compared the short-term outcome (mean, 37.2 months) of 28 patients who had bilateral simultaneous reconstructions with that of a matched group of patients who had unilateral reconstruction. Results Postoperative narcotic requirements for pain did not differ between groups. The mean quadriceps muscle strength for the simultaneous group was 99% in the right leg and 102% in the left leg compared with the strongest leg preoperatively; the mean for the unilateral group was 99%. The mean modified Noyes score for the simultaneous group was 91.2 points in the left knee and 93.5 points for the right knee; the mean for the unilateral group was 88.7 points. The mean time to return to full-time work and to full sports was 4.1 weeks and 6.1 months for the simultaneous group and 3.0 weeks and 6.3 months for the unilateral group. The mean hospital costs were $6687 and $4307, respectively. Conclusions When clinical indications exist, we recommend simultaneous bilateral anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction as opposed to staged procedures because it is a safe, effective, and cost-effective option.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Lavender, Chad, Sohaib Malik, Dana Lycans, Matthew Hooper, and Kassandra Flores. "Nanoscopic-Assisted Anterior Cruciate Ligament−Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Arthroscopy Techniques 10, no. 7 (July 2021): e1839-e1844. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2021.04.003.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Marumo, Keishi, Mitsuru Saito, Tsuneo Yamagishi, and Katsuyuki Fujii. "The “Ligamentization” Process in Human Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with Autogenous Patellar and Hamstring Tendons." American Journal of Sports Medicine 33, no. 8 (August 2005): 1166–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546504271973.

Full text

Abstract:

Background There is little information documenting whether the phenomenon of “ligamentization,” as proposed by Amiel, occurs in the human anterior cruciate ligament after clinically effective reconstruction. To clarify this point, we analyzed biochemical differences between the native anterior cruciate ligament; the patellar, semitendinosus, and gracilis tendons; and anterior cruciate ligaments reconstructed with autografts. Study Design Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods Fifty patients who underwent arthroscopically assisted anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using either semi-tendinosus and gracilis tendon or bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts were selected for the study. Samples of grafted tissue were collected during arthroscopy and quantitatively analyzed for collagen content and the amount of reducible and nonreducible crosslinks at 4 to 6 postoperative months in patients with semitendinosus and gracilis tendon grafts and at 11 to 13 months in all patients with semitendinosus and gracilis tendon or bone-patellar tendon-bone grafts. Results The total collagen content and nonreducible/reducible crosslink ratios increased significantly during the postoperative period (P < .05). The dihydroxylysinonorleucine/hydroxylysinonorleucine ratio was 3.11 ± 0.56 in the native anterior cruciate ligament, 1.21 ± 0.47 in the patellar tendon, and 3.59 ± 1.58 in the anterior cruciate ligaments reconstructed with bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts 1 year after surgery. The dihydroxylysinonorleucine/hydroxylysinonorleucine ratio in both semitendinosus and gracilis tendons was less than 1.0. However, in anterior cruciate ligaments reconstructed with semitendinosus and gracilis tendon autografts, it was 2.34 ± 0.98 at 4 to 6 months and 3.43 ± 1.61 at 11 to 13 months after the operation. Conclusions After anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autografts, biochemical characteristics of the graft resembled those of the native anterior cruciate ligament. These findings suggest that, regarding the amount of collagen crosslinks and their architecture, the phenomenon of ligamentization occurs in the successfully reconstructed human anterior cruciate ligament within 1 year after operation.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Lee, Joon Kyu, and Myung Chul Lee. "Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Journal of Korean Knee Society 23, no. 2 (2011): 61. http://dx.doi.org/10.5792/jkks.2011.23.2.61.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Werner, Brian C., Carl J. Gilmore, Joshua C. Hamann, Cree M. Gaskin, John J. Carroll, Joseph M. Hart, and Mark D. Miller. "Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 24, no. 8 (August 2016): 581–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/jaaos-d-15-00572.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Gagliardi, Alexia G., and Jay C. Albright. "Pediatric Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Orthopedics 41, no. 3 (May 1, 2018): 129–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20180501-06.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Miller, Mark D., Michelle E. Kew, and Courtney A. Quinn. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision Reconstruction." Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 29, no. 17 (June 7, 2021): 723–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/jaaos-d-21-00088.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Kanesaki, Katsuya, Hiroshi Hieda, Hisao Takagi, Hiroshi Goto, Toru Gohara, Kensuke Sakai, Takahiko Sannomiya, and Masahiro Yokouchi. "Reconstruction of Anterior Cruciate Ligament." Orthopedics & Traumatology 43, no. 2 (1994): 613–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.5035/nishiseisai.43.613.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Kraeutler, Matthew J., Linnea K. Welton, Eric C. McCarty, and Jonathan T. Bravman. "Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume 99A, no. 19 (October 2017): 1689–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.17.00412.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

SHINO, KONSEI, SHUJI HORIBE, MASAYUKI HAMADA, NORIMASA NAKAMURA, KEN NAKATA, YUKIYOSHI TORITSUKA, and TATSUO MAE. "Allograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Techniques in Knee Surgery 1, no. 2 (December 2002): 78–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00132588-200212000-00002.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Wright, Rick W., Amanda K. Haas, Joy Anderson, Gary Calabrese, John Cavanaugh, Timothy E. Hewett, Dawn Lorring, et al. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Rehabilitation." Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach 7, no. 3 (January 17, 2014): 239–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1941738113517855.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Murawski, Christopher D., Megan R. Wolf, Daisuke Araki, Bart Muller, Scott Tashman, and Freddie H. Fu. "Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." CARTILAGE 4, no. 3_suppl (April 24, 2013): 27S—37S. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1947603513486557.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Ohly, N. E., I. R. Murray, and J. F. Keating. "Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction." Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume 89-B, no. 8 (August 2007): 1051–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.89b8.19000.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Verma, Nikhil N., Eric W. Carson, Russell F. Warren, and Thomas L. Wickiewicz. "Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Review 13, no. 1 (March 2005): 46–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.jsa.0000151365.41165.8b.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Hamman, Daniel R., and Marc R. Safran. "Allograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Techniques in Knee Surgery 8, no. 1 (March 2009): 54–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/btk.0b013e31819c816a.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Herz, Amy L., and John D. Kelly. "Holistic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Techniques in Knee Surgery 10, no. 1 (March 2011): 45–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/btk.0b013e31820d6d5f.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Allen, Christina R., J. Robert Giffin, and Christopher D. Harner. "Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction." Orthopedic Clinics of North America 34, no. 1 (January 2003): 79–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0030-5898(02)00066-4.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Perkins, Crystal A., and S. Clifton Willimon. "Pediatric Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Orthopedic Clinics of North America 51, no. 1 (January 2020): 55–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2019.08.009.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Veltri, Daniel M., and M. C. Maj USAF. "ARTHROSCOPIC ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION." Clinics in Sports Medicine 16, no. 1 (January 1997): 123–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0278-5919(05)70010-7.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Wilcox, Philip G., and Douglas W. Jackson. "Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction." Clinics in Sports Medicine 6, no. 3 (July 1987): 513–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0278-5919(20)31007-3.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

McConkey, Mark O., Davide Edoardo Bonasia, and Annunziato Amendola. "Pediatric anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction." Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 4, no. 2 (April 7, 2011): 37–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12178-011-9076-9.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Noyes, Frank R., and Sue D. Barber-Westin. "Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision Reconstruction." American Journal of Sports Medicine 34, no. 4 (April 2006): 553–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0363546505281812.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!