2017 ISAKOS Biennial Congress ePoster #1080


Outcomes and Arthroscopic Findings after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Fixed- and Adjustable-Loop Suspension Devices

Jong-Keun Seon, MD, PhD, Prof, Gwangju, Jeonnam KOREA, REPUBLIC OF
Eun-Kyoo Song, MD, PhD, Prof., Gwangju KOREA, REPUBLIC OF
Dong-Hyun Lee, MD, Gwang-Ju KOREA, REPUBLIC OF
Je-Hyoung Yeo, MD, Gwangju KOREA, REPUBLIC OF
Cheng Jin, Fellow, Gwangju KOREA, REPUBLIC OF

Center for Joint Disease, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Hwasun, Chonnam, KOREA, REPUBLIC OF

FDA Status Cleared


both group provided good functional and radiologic outcomes without significant differences



Adjustable-loop devices were designed to adapt to different tunnel lengths, however, there were some concern that these devices introduces the possibility of loop lengthening and subsequent graft displacement. The purpose of this prospective clinical study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes including tunnel widening and to evaluate graft status by second-look arthroscopy after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction between different femoral cortical suspension device, a fixed loop and adjustable loop device.

Materials And Methods

Among 91 patients with an ACL injury underwent ACL reconstruction, 53 patients of fixed loop group and 38 patients of adjustable loop group were included for this study after minimum of 2-year follow-up. All patient used autograft of hamstring tendon. The Lachman and pivot-shift tests, Tegner activity score, Lysholm knee score, and IKDC score were compared for clinical outcome between the two groups. Tunnel widening was evaluated through plain radiograph and side to side difference by anterior drawer stress test was checked to compare radiologic outcomes. 48 patients (27 patients in fixed loop group and 21 in the adjustable loop group) underwent the second-look arthroscopy, in which we compared the apparent tear of graft and synovial coverage of grafts.


At the final follow-up, there were no statistical significances in the two groups in Lachman test (p=0.170) and pivot-shift tests (p=0.706). The Tegner activity, Lysholm knee score, and IKDC scores were similar in the two groups (p>0.05). Moreover regarding the findings of second-look arthroscopy, although there was no significant difference in graft tear (p=0.578) and synovial coverage (p=0.712). Radiologic findings comparing tunnel widening and instability showed no significant difference (p>0.05).


Even though the intended flexibility of adjustable-loop system has possibility of loop lengthening and subsequent graft displacement, compared with fixed-loop system, both group provided good functional and radiologic outcomes without significant differences. Also the second-look arthroscopy revealed no difference in graft tear and synovial coverage between fixed-loop and adjustable-loop device.