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

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Patellar Tendon Versus Hamstring Tendon

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
August 2013

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Patellar Tendon Versus Hamstring Tendon

Vol: 2| Issue: 7| Number:351| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Patellar Tendon Versus Hamstring Tendon: A Prospective Comparative Study With 9-Year Follow-Up

The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery, Vol 27, No 5 (May), 2011: pp 653-665.

Contributing Authors:
B Wipfler S Donner CM Zechmann J Springer R Siebold HH Paessler

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

Synopsis

71 patients with an acute rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) were randomized to receive either a bone-patellar tendon (BPT) or a quadruple hamstring tendon (HT) for ACL reconstruction, using an anatomic, non-press fit (non implant) technique. Clinical results from the international knee documentation committee and results from kneeling, knee walking and a single-leg hop test demonstra...

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