Abstract
Aim: Goal of this prospective, randomized study is the functional evaluation of two different techniques of ACL reconstruction by using bone-patellatendon (BPT) vs. hamstrings (ST/G). Methods: 62 ACL-insufficient patients (33 women/29 men) took part in this study. 31 (mean:29,8 y.) underwent ACL-reconstruction using BPT (GI). 31 (mean: 34,2 y.) patients underwent ACL-reconstruction using ST/G (GII). Both techniques were press-fit and implant-free. We used accelerated rehabilitation for both groups. Patients were evaluated by IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner score, KT 1000, one-leg-hop, isokinetics, internal torque, kneeling- and knee-walking-test, 1 day preop., and 3, 6 and 12 months postop. Results: One year results of GII were according to IKDC-score (GII: 30 patients= A and B vs. GI: 24 patients= A and B), Lysholm-score (GII: 95,61 vs. GI: 90,87 (p=0.017) and Tegner-score (GII: 7,07 vs. GI: 6,61 (p=0.00)) better than those of GI. The Evaluation of the strength of hamstrings using isokinetics showed significant differences: GII: 90,34 Nm vs. 99,19 Nm in GI, (p=0.008). However results concerning the internal torque evaluation were not significant. The one-leg-hop comparing injured and non-injured leg resulted in significant differences: GII: 96% vs. GI: 91%, (p=0.012). Results in GI were significantly worse than in GII at kneelling and kneewalking-testings ((p=0.00)(p=0.00)). Conclusion: All scoring, clinical and functional evaluations, except isokinetic hamstring evaluation, showed a hamstring’s supperiority in ACL reconstruction.
Theses abstracts were prepared by Professor Dr. Frantz Langlais. Correspondence should be addressed to him at EFORT Central Office, Freihofstrasse 22, CH-8700 Küsnacht, Switzerland.
