ISAKOS: 2019 Congress in Cancun, Mexico
ISAKOS

2019 ISAKOS Biennial Congress ePoster #791

 

Clinical Outcomes of Double-Bundle Reconstruction versus Remnant-Preserving Single-Bundle Augmentation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Atsuo Nakamae, MD, PhD, Hiroshima JAPAN
Masakazu Ishikawa, MD, PhD, Hiroshima JAPAN
Tomoyuki Nakasa, MD, PhD, Matsuyama JAPAN
Mitsuo Ochi, MD, PhD, Higashi, Hiroshima JAPAN
Nobuo Adachi, MD, PhD, Hiroshima JAPAN

Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, JAPAN

FDA Status Not Applicable

Summary

Clinical outcomes (KOOS, IKDC score, the Lysholm knee score, anterior knee laxity, the pivot-shift test, and the postoperative range of motion of the knee) of patients with the remnant-preserving single-bundle ACL augmentation are comparable, if not superior, with that of patients undergoing the double-bundle ACL reconstruction.

Abstract

Objectives:
This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of remnant-preserving single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) augmentation with those of double-bundle ACL reconstruction with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years.

Methods

This prospective cohort study comprised 74 patients with an isolated ACL injury: 35 patients underwent double-bundle ACL reconstruction and 39 patients underwent remnant-preserving single-bundle ACL augmentation. When it was decided during arthroscopy that the ACL remnant was not worth preserving, complete resection of the ACL remnants and double-bundle reconstruction using semitendinosus tendon were performed. When the ACL remnant seemed to be worth preserving, remnant-preserving single-bundle augmentation using semitendinosus tendon was performed. Patients were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively with the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, the Lysholm knee score, measurement of anterior knee laxity using an arthrometer, the pivot-shift test, and the postoperative range of motion of the knee.

Results

The mean side-to-side differences measured with an arthrometer at the final follow-up were 0.8 mm in the remnant-preserving augmentation group and 0.9 mm in the double-bundle group; the result did not differ significantly between the two groups (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in the KOOS, IKDC score, the Lysholm knee score, the pivot-shift test, and the postoperative range of motion of the knee between the two groups (P<0.05).

Conclusions

Clinical outcomes of patients with the remnant-preserving single-bundle ACL augmentation are comparable, if not superior, with that of patients undergoing the double-bundle ACL reconstruction.