We have located links that may give you full text access.
LARS versus hamstring tendon autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a single-centre, single surgeon retrospective study with 8 years of follow-up.
PURPOSE: The choice of graft type in the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains a subject of controversy. The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes in ACL reconstructions performed using a four-strand hamstring tendon graft (4SHG) or a LARS ligament comparing the effectiveness of the two grafts at a medium follow-up of 8 years.
METHODS: This retrospective, single-centre, single surgeon study evaluated the clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes in 50 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction (25 4SHG and 25 LARS). Patients who underwent surgery after more than 6 months from injury and showed radiographically visible degenerative changes at time of surgery were excluded from the study.
RESULTS: None of the patients underwent re-surgery in the same knee. The range of motion of the operated knee, compared to the contralateral, was good for both groups. The anterior drawer test resulted negative in 21 patients (84%) in the LARS group and eight patients (32%) in the 4SHG group (P = 0.039). The Lachman test was negative in 19 patients (76%) in the LARS group and in 11 patients (44%) in the 4SHG group (P = 0.045). Although other results of ACL reconstruction measured by Lysholm scores, IKDC evaluation, Tegner scores and radiographic images showed using a LARS graft tended to be superior to using a 4SHG, there were no statistically significant differences calculated.
CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that 4 years after ACL reconstruction using a LARS ligament or 4SHG dramatically improves the function outcome, while the patients in the LARS group displayed a higher knee stability than those in the 4SHG group.
METHODS: This retrospective, single-centre, single surgeon study evaluated the clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes in 50 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction (25 4SHG and 25 LARS). Patients who underwent surgery after more than 6 months from injury and showed radiographically visible degenerative changes at time of surgery were excluded from the study.
RESULTS: None of the patients underwent re-surgery in the same knee. The range of motion of the operated knee, compared to the contralateral, was good for both groups. The anterior drawer test resulted negative in 21 patients (84%) in the LARS group and eight patients (32%) in the 4SHG group (P = 0.039). The Lachman test was negative in 19 patients (76%) in the LARS group and in 11 patients (44%) in the 4SHG group (P = 0.045). Although other results of ACL reconstruction measured by Lysholm scores, IKDC evaluation, Tegner scores and radiographic images showed using a LARS graft tended to be superior to using a 4SHG, there were no statistically significant differences calculated.
CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that 4 years after ACL reconstruction using a LARS ligament or 4SHG dramatically improves the function outcome, while the patients in the LARS group displayed a higher knee stability than those in the 4SHG group.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app