The Functional Outcome of Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Patients Using Different Graft Tension During Tibial Fixation

Gabriel Alfonso B. Javier, Alberto Ma. V. Molano

Apr 2019 DOI 10.35460/2546-1621.2018-0056     Access   

Abstract

Background: Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction is commonly performed to restore knee kinematics and halt the progression of osteoarthritis. A primary variable that could influence the outcome of ACL reconstruction is the tension applied to the graft at the time of fixation. If the tension is too great, an abnormal compressive force could potentially develop across the tibiofemoral joint, hindering knee motion, and subjecting the articular surfaces to increased stress. If the tension in the graft is too low, the graft will not be effective in restoring normal kinematics. The Tegner Lysholm Knee Scale is a functional scoring for patients with ligamentous injuries. It is a patient-reported measure of knee function and is important for comprehensive assessment conditions in both the clinical and research context. Our objective was to compare which tension technique (15 lbs graft tension using a Mitek Tensioner™ vs maximal sustained two-hand technique) would yield better functional outcome at 6 months and 12 months postoperatively using the Tegner Lysholm Knee Scale.

Methods: Twenty-nine patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction at the University of Santo Tomas Hospital Private Division were randomly divided equally into two groups (group A or group B). During tibial fixation, group A would receive 15 lbs graft tension using a Mitek Tensioner and group B would receive graft tension using the maximal sustained two-handed pull technique. The patients underwent a standard rehabilitation protocol at an institution of their choice and a Lysholm Scoring Scale and Tegner activity scale were self-administered at 6 months and 12 months after the surgery in order to assess their functional outcome.

Results: The results showed that the functional outcome scores of group A were higher than group B. The yielded p-value was 0.10 (6 months), 0.07 (12 months) for group A and 0.27 (6 months), 0.46 (12 months) for group B. The results showed no sufficient evidence of a significant difference between the effects of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with 15 lbs weight using a Mitek Tensioner (group A) and graft tension using the maximal sustained two-handed pull technique (group B) in the knee functional outcome of patients at 6 months and 12 months postoperatively.

Conclusion: The functional outcome scores of patients who underwent ACL reconstruction using different graft tension did not show significant results. Further re-evaluation of patients' functional outcome score is necessary after 12 months postoperatively. The desired tensioning technique of the ACL surgeon would be at his/her convenience knowing beforehand the pros and cons of each technique.

 

Keywords: Arthroscopic ACL reconstruction, Lysholm Scoring Scale, Tegner activity scale, graft tension, tibial fixation

  1. Roos PJ, Hull ML, Howell SM. Lengthening of double-looped tendon graft constructs in three regions after cyclic loading: a study using Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis. J Orthop Res. 2004;22(4):839–46.
  2. Fleming B, Beynnon B, Howe J, McLeod W, Pope M. Effect of tension and placement of a prosthetic anterior cruciate ligament on the anteroposterior laxity of the knee. Journal of Orthopaedic Research. 1992 Mar;10(2):177–86.
  3. Coleridge SD, Amis AA. A comparison of five tibial-fixation systems in hamstring-graft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2004 Sep 1;12(5):391–7.
  4. Briggs KK. Lysholm score and Tegner activity level in individuals with normal knees. Am J Sports Med. 2009 May;37(5):898–901. Epub 2009 Mar 23.
  5. Dargel J, Gotter M, Mader M, Pennig D. Biomechanics of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Implications for Surgical Reconstruction. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2007 Apr; 2(1):1–12.
  6. Oneill J, Byrne F, Hirpara K, McHugh P, Curtin W. Anterior Cruciate Ligament Graft Tensioning. Is the Maximal Sustained Pull Technique Reproducible? BMC Research Notes. 2011 July 20.
  7. Thompson DM, Hull ML, Howell SM. Does a tensioning device pinned to the tibia improve knee anterior–posterior load‐displacement compared to manual tensioning of the graft following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A cadaveric study of two tibial fixation devices. Journal of Orthopaedic Research. 2006 Sep;24(9):1832–41.
  8. Carmont M. Anatomic Single Bundle ACL Reconstruction. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2011 June;4(2):65–72.
  9. Marx RG, Jones EC, Allen AA, Altchek DW, O'Brien SJ, Rodeo SA, et al. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of four knee outcome scales for athletic patients. JBJS. 2001 Oct 1;83(10):1459–69.

Articles related to the one you are viewing

There are currently no results to show, please try again later

CC BY: Open Access 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 license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license 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 license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/