ACE Report Cover
3 different ACL reconstruction techniques displayed similar loss in bone mineral density
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
SPORTS MEDICINE
3 different ACL reconstruction techniques displayed similar loss in bone mineral density .
Verified
This report has been verified by one or more authors of the original publication.

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2013;1(12):239 Knee. 2012 Dec;19(6):779-85. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2012.02.005. Epub 2012 Mar 16
Autori che hanno contribuito

PP Lui YY Cheng SH Yung AS Hung KM Chan

62 male adult patients undergoing ACL reconstruction (ACLR) were randomized to either bone-patella tendon-bone (BPTB) graft, single-bundle hamstring (HT-SB) graft, or double-bundle hamstring (HT-DB) graft techniques. Changes in bone mineral density (BMD) of the three different ACLR techniques were measured at 1 day, 3 months, 5 months, and 1 year post-operation. Similar results were seen in the three ACLR techniques in terms of bone loss at the knee region, irreversible bone loss at the hip, and early clinical and functional outcomes up to 1 year after surgery. Additionally, a positive correlation existed between BMD at the distal femur and single-leg hop distance a 1 year post-operation.


Dettagli sul finanziamento della pubblicazione +
Finanziamento:
Non-Industry funded
Sponsor:
Hong Kong Jockey Club Charity Trust
Conflicts:
None disclosed

Rischio di pregiudizio

6,5/10

Criteri di segnalazione

18/20

Indice di fragilità

N/A

Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?

Was allocation adequately concealed?

Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?

Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?

Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?

Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?

Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?

Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?

Sì = 1

Incerto = 0,5

Non rilevante = 0

No = 0

La valutazione dei criteri di segnalazione valuta la trasparenza con cui gli autori riportano le caratteristiche metodologiche e sperimentali dello studio all'interno della pubblicazione. La valutazione è suddivisa in cinque categorie che vengono presentate di seguito.

3/4

Randomization

3/4

Outcome Measurements

4/4

Inclusion / Exclusion

4/4

Therapy Description

4/4

Statistics

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

L'Indice di Fragilità è uno strumento che aiuta l'interpretazione dei risultati significativi, fornendo una misura della forza di un risultato. L'Indice di Fragilità rappresenta il numero di eventi consecutivi che devono essere aggiunti a un risultato dicotomico per rendere il risultato non più significativo. Un numero piccolo rappresenta un risultato più debole, mentre un numero grande rappresenta un risultato più forte.

Perché questo studio era necessario ora?

Multiple studies have shown that after ACL reconstruction using BPTB graft, there can be a significant decrease in BMD around the knee region. However, many of these studies were neither randomized nor controlled, causing uncertainty in the reliability of the results. Additionally, none of these studies assessed BMD in HT-SB or HT-DB graft ACL reconstruction. This trial aimed to determine whether changes in BMD varied significantly between the ACL reconstruction techniques and elucidate the impact of BMD on the early functional or clinical outcomes.

Qual era la domanda di ricerca principale?

Did BMD change around the knee region differ depending on the type of ACL reconstruction technique (BPTB, HT-SB, HS-DB) and did BMD loss at the knee region have a negative impact on the recovery of patients post-surgery when examined over a 1 year period?

Caratteristiche dello studio +
Population:
62 male adult patients who underwent either BPTB, or HT-SB, or HT-DB graft ACL reconstruction surgery. (Age at time of surgery: 18-40)
Intervention:
HT-SB Group: Patients underwent ACL reconstruction using HT-SB graft. For the HT-SB surgery, the semitendinosus and gracilis tendons were harvested and inserted into the femoral and tibial tunnels. (n=22) HT-DB Group: Patients underwent ACLR using HT-DB graft. For the HT-DB surgery, the semitendinosus and gracilis tendons were harvested. The anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) tunnels were drilled over the femur and tibia. Following that, the AM and PL grafts were fixed in the tibial tunnels (n=20)
Comparison:
BPTB Group: Patients underwent ACL reconstruction using BPTB graft. For the BPTB surgery, 1/3 of the patellar tendon was harvested with one end over the apex of the patella, while the other was put above the tibial tubercle. (n=20)
Outcomes:
The outcomes were clinical (measured using the manual Lachman test and KT-1000) and functional (measured using the single-leg hop test, Lysholm score, IKDC score)
Methods:
RCT; single center; blinded
Time:
Outcomes measured at 1 day, 3 months, 5 months, and 1 year after surgery
Quali erano i risultati importanti?
  • BMD at both the distal femur and proximal tibia decreased significantly at month 3 post-op (distal femur: -6.5% +/-6.9%; proximal tibia: -4.8% +/-7.0%) and month 5 post-op (distal femur: -7.3% +/-10.1%; proximal tibia: -5.6% +/-12.6%), increased and became insignificantly different from day 1 at 1 year post-op (distal femur: -1.6% +/-10.3%; proximal tibia: 0% +/-13.0%).
  • There was no significant difference in BMD loss at the distal femur and proximal tibia among the three surgical techniques (p=0.205 and 0.121, respectively).
  • There was significant irreversible loss of BMD at both the trochanteric region (month 3: -3.6% +/-3.3%; month 5: -4.5% +/-8.2%; 1 year: -4.2% +/-6.2%) and the femoral neck (month 3: -1.9% +/-3.7%; month 5: -2.4% +/-8.3%; 1 year: -2.5% +/-6.8%) of the injured limb.
  • There was no significant difference in BMD loss among the three surgical techniques at the trochanteric region and femoral neck.
  • At 1 year post-op, there were no significant differences between the different surgical techniques in IKDC score (p=0.759), Lysholm score (p=0.541), single-leg hop distance ratio (p=0.504), KT-1000 side-to-side difference (p=0.120), and manual Lachman test score (p=0.477)
  • After combining data from the different groups, at 1 year post-op there was a significant improvement from baseline in IKDC score, Lysholm score, single-leg hop distance ratio, KT-1000 side-to-side difference, and manual Lachman test score (all p<0.001)
  • Between BMD at the distal femur and the single-leg hop distance of the injured limb at 1 year post-op, a significant positive correlation was observed (r=0.299, p=0.031)
Che cosa devo ricordare di più?

The results indicated that BMD loss was similar between BPTB graft, HT-SB graft, and HT-DB graft ACL reconstruction techniques. Additionally, early clinical and functional outcomes were similar among the three groups. As well, BMD at the distal femur and the single-leg hop distance a 1 year post-operation were positively related to one another.

Come influenzerà l'assistenza ai miei pazienti?

There appear to be no significant differences in BMD following these three types of ACL reconstruction in male patients. Further research is required to determine changes of BMD in female patients who have undergone different types of ACL reconstruction and if the type of rehabilitation has an effect. Moreover, the use of other high-resolution bone imaging systems, such as XtremeCT for in vivo BMD measurement can be incorporated in future studies in order to provide more data.

DISCLAIMER

Il contenuto di questa pagina è solo a scopo informativo e non intende sostituire la consulenza, la diagnosi o il trattamento medico professionale. Se ha bisogno di cure mediche, si rivolga sempre al suo medico o al pronto soccorso più vicino. Le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista espressi dalle persone sui contenuti presenti in questa pagina non riflettono le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista di OrthoEvidence.

0 di 4 articoli mensili GRATUITI sbloccati
Ha raggiunto il suo limite di 4 visualizzazioni di articoli gratuiti questo mese

Accesso a OrthoEvidence a soli 1,99 dollari a settimana.

Rimanga in contatto con le ultime prove. Può disdire in qualsiasi momento.
  • Valutazioni critiche dei più recenti studi randomizzati controllati ad alto impatto e delle revisioni sistematiche in ortopedia.
  • Accesso ai contenuti del podcast OrthoEvidence, tra cui collaborazioni con il Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviste con chirurghi di fama internazionale e tavole rotonde su notizie e argomenti ortopedici.
  • Abbonamento a The Pulse, una newsletter bisettimanale basata sulle evidenze scientifiche, progettata per aiutarla a prendere decisioni cliniche migliori.
Upgrade
Bentornato!
Ha dimenticato la password?
Inizi la sua prova gratuita oggi stesso!

Il suo account sarà affiliato a
e includerà l'accesso gratuito a OrthoEvidence


O
Ha dimenticato la password?

O
Controlli la sua e-mail

Se esiste un account con l'indirizzo e-mail fornito, le verrà inviata un'e-mail di reimpostazione della password. Se non vede l'e-mail, controlli la cartella spam o posta indesiderata.

Per ulteriore assistenza, contatti il nostro team di supporto.

Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Tradurre il Rapporto ACE

OrthoEvidence utilizza un servizio di traduzione di terze parti per rendere i contenuti accessibili in più lingue. Si prega di notare che, sebbene venga fatto ogni sforzo per garantire l'accuratezza, le traduzioni potrebbero non essere sempre perfette.

Come citare questo documento ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. 3 different ACL reconstruction techniques displayed similar loss in bone mineral density. OE Journal. 2013;1(12):239. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/3-different-acl-reconstruction-techniques-displayed-similar-loss-in-bone-mineral-density

Copiare la citazione
Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Funzionalità per i membri Premium

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence Premium.

Condividi questo articolo ACE Report