To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Femoral fixation with intra- vs extratunnel methods in double-bundle ACL reconstruction

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
April 2015

Femoral fixation with intra- vs extratunnel methods in double-bundle ACL reconstruction

Vol: 4| Issue: 4| Number:62| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Randomized Trial
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:2

Intratunnel versus extratunnel autologous hamstring double-bundle graft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of 2 femoral fixation procedures

Am J Sports Med. 2015 Jan;43(1):161-8

Contributing Authors:
SA Ibrahim S Abdul Ghafar Y Marwan AM Mahgoub A Al Misfer H Farouk M Wagdy H Alherran S Khirait

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

70 patients undergoing double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction were randomized to either intratunnel or extratunnel femoral fixation. One group was treated with the RigidFix crosspin system (Mitek), and the other was treated with EndoButton (Smith & Nephew). Bioabsorbable interference screws were used for tibial fixation in both groups. Clinical examination and patient-report...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue