Purpose: The dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) technique is based on a different treatment approach than ACL reconstruction in that it intends to promote self-healing of the ligament. It is only recommended for acute injuries (<21days). The purpose of the present study was to compare DIS and ACLR with respect to the extent of work incapacity, revision rates, secondary arthroscopies, and treatment costs during recovery.
Methods: The study was a post-hoc analysis of prospectively collected data in the Swiss National Accident Insurance Fund (SUVA) database. All registered DIS cases treated until 31 December 2012 were included in the study. ACLR cases were matched to DIS cases using a propensity score approach and analysed in a follow-up period of 2 years after injury. Paired Student's T-test and the Chi-square test were used to compare the outcome measures.
Results: All 53 DIS patients were matched to an ACLR pair. The mean time period from injury to surgery was 14days for DIS and 50days for ACLR (p<0.001). Overall work incapacity was 13% for DIS and 17% for ACLR resulting in a difference of nearly 1 month of absence from work (p=0.03). The course of postoperative work incapacity was very similar between the groups, while the work incapacity prior to surgery lower in the DIS group. We found no difference in treatment costs, secondary arthroscopies and revision rates.
Conclusion: DIS patients benefited from nearly one month shorter absence from work than ACLR patients. This difference is likely related to the early surgical timing that is recommended for DIS. Since no differences were found between DIS and ACLR in terms of treatment costs, secondary arthroscopies and revision rates, the study supports the choice of DIS as an additional treatment option for acute ACL injuries. Further comparative studies are proposed to improve the evidence about optimal timing and best practice in ACL treatment.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2017.03.004 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Editorial Commentary: Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair Could Be Indicated in Older, Less Active Patients.
Arthroscopy
December 2024
Mass General Brigham Sports Medicine.
Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries do not heal anatomically on their own and often lead to post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA). ACL reconstruction, though effective, can contribute to PTOA, and donor site morbidity remains a concern with autografts. While ACL repair has traditionally shown poorer outcomes (27% failure rate in the 1990s and early 2000s), a recent review of newer techniques shows promising results and no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes between repair and reconstruction.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPurpose: The primary aim of this study was to assess non-inferiority in functional performance of the knee after dynamic intraligamentary stabilisation (DIS) surgery at a minimal follow-up of 1 year compared to healthy controls, based on limb symmetry index (LSI) of the single leg hop test (SLH). Additionally, functional performance based on the single leg triple hop test (SLTH) and side hop test (SH), proprioception and subjective outcome were evaluated.
Methods: A total of 45 DIS patients were 1-to-1 matched to a healthy control.
Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Repair Using Dynamic Intraligamentary Stabilization Combined with Lateral Extra-articular Augmentation: A Case Report and Technical Note.
Cureus
September 2024
Department of Knee and Hip Surgery, Schulthess Klinik, Zurich, CHE.
The treatment options for an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture range from conservative therapy to ACL repair and reconstruction. ACL repair is particularly suitable for younger patients with an acute proximal tear, and moderate athletic demand. Preserving the ACL can restore its proprioceptive and stabilizing functions, avoid donor site morbidity, and shorten rehabilitation time.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAnterior Cruciate Ligament Repair Results in Similar Patient-Reported Outcome Measures as Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Prospective Comparative Studies.
Arthroscopy
September 2024
Department of Orthopaedics, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.. Electronic address:
Purpose: To investigate the patient-reported outcomes (PROs), knee stability, and complications in prospective comparative studies of patients undergoing augmented anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair compared with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).
Methods: A literature search was performed according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Human clinical studies of Level I-II evidence comparing PROs, knee stability, and complications after ACL repair and reconstruction were included, and a qualitative analysis was performed.
Anatomic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is the gold standard treatment for ACL injury and has been shown to restore the 3-dimensional joint laxity. Recently, however, there is renewed interest in primary repair of the injured ACL in selected cases. Research shows that, in some cases, short- and midterm outcomes of ACL repair are favorable, albeit with greater failure rates than ACL reconstruction.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!