A Comparative Study of Clinical Outcomes and Second-Look Arthroscopic Findings between Remnant-Preserving Tibialis Tendon Allograft and Hamstring Tendon Autograft in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Matched-Pair Design

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare stability, functional outcome, and second-look arthroscopic findings after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction between remnant-preserving tibialis tendon allograft and remnant-sacrificing hamstring tendon autograft. METHODS: We matched two groups (remnant-preserving tibialis tendon allograft group and hamstring tendon autograft group) in terms of demographic characteristics, associated injury, and knee characteristics. Each group consisted of 25 patients. RESULTS: Operation time was longer in the remnant-preserving tibialis tendon allograft group, but there was no significant intergroup difference in stability, clinical outcome, and second-look arthroscopic findings. CONCLUSIONS: When an autograft is not feasible in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, the remnant-preserving technique can produce comparable results in terms of restoration of function, stability of the knee, and degree of synovium coverage at second-look arthroscopy compared to remnant-sacrificing hamstring autograft.

Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Remnant Preserving versus Remnant Sacrificing Technique after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Clinical Results and Second-Look Arthroscopic Findings: Pilot Study / 대한정형외과학회잡지

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to clarify the difference between the remnant-preserving and remnant-sacrificing techniques in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using stress test, functional score, 2nd look arthroscopy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among 66 patients having anatomical ACL reconstruction with the fourstrand hamstring autograft using outside-in technique (FlipCutter(R)) for the femoral tunnel from April 2012 to April 2014, 23 patients who underwent 2nd look arthroscopy and MRI were included. The remnant-preserving group included 12 patients and the remnant-sacrificing group included 11 patients. The two groups were compared and analyzed with regard to stability (Stress test using GNRB(R), pivot shift test), functional assessment (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] scale, Lysholm score, one leg hoop test), and the result of second-look arthroscopy and signal to noise quotient (SNQ) ratio of the graft in MRI. RESULTS: The two groups did not differ significantly in the stability test, IKDC scale, and Lysholm test. The remnant-preserving group showed significant improvement in one leg hoop test compared with the remnant-sacrificing group (p0.05). CONCLUSION: More than 12 months after surgery, the graft of the remnant-preserving group showed lower signal intensity compared to that of the remnant-sacrificing group by MRI evaluation. The remnant preserving technique has biological difference compared with the remnant sacrificing technique in human study.

Comparison of Clinical Results and Second-Look Arthroscopic Findings of Remnant Preserving versus Non-Remnant Preserving Technique after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Achilles Allograft / 대한정형외과학회잡지

PURPOSE: This study was conducted for evaluation of clinical uses of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with an Achilles allograft using the remnant technique by comparison and analysis stability, functional assessment and results of second-look arthroscopy between the remnant technique and the non-remnanat technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 48 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction using an Achilles allograft were selected and divided into two groups depending on the presence of remnant. The preserving group included 26 patients and non-preserving group included 22 patients. The two groups were compared and analyzed with regarding to stability (Stress view Lachman test, pivot shift test), functional assessment (International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm score, Tegner score, single hoop test, shuttle turn, carioca test), and the result of second-look arthroscopy (study design: prosepective cohort study). RESULTS: In the final result, the remnant group showed significant improvement in the Tegner and carioca tests compared with the non-remnant group (p<0.05). In second-look arthroscopy, the remnant group showed better coverage of synovium (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: ACL reconstruction with an Achilles allograft using the remnant technique showed better results in functional assessment and finding in second-look arthroscopy compared with the non-remnant technique group.

Proprioceptive and Knee Joint Kinematics for Comparison of Remnant Preserved versus Non-remnant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Achilles Allograft / 대한스포츠의학회지

The purpose of remnant preserving technique in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is to preserve mechanoreceptor and accelerate revascularization. In this study, we compared a group who underwent remnant preserving technique using Achilles tendon allograft with the other group of conventional ACL reconstruction in terms of proprioception, kinematic analysis, knee strength test and dynamic postural stability. Twenty-four patients were followed up for longer than 12 months after ACL reconstruction. They were separated into two groups; remnant preserving group (n=12) and non-remnant group (n=12). Proprioception test was conducted through joint position sense (JPS) and threshold to detection of passive motion. The remnant preserving group showed significantly less difference from the normal side than the non-remnant group. In kinematic analysis, there was statistically significant difference in peak flexion angle during the swing phase. However the 60degrees JPS, knee strength test, performance capacity test and dynamic postural stability did not showed the significant difference. Remnant preserving technique of ACL reconstruction was meaningful in preserving proprioception and the result showed akin to the unaffected gait.