Author:
Xu Changli,Liu Tianze,Wang Miao,Liu Chang,Li Bo,Lian Qiujian,Chen Tongjiang,Chen Fengmei,Qiao Suchi,Wang Zhiwei
Abstract
Abstract
Background
To compare proprioception recovery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with a hamstring tendon autograft versus the artificial Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System (LARS).
Material and methods
Forty patients (9 females, 31 males) with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture were enrolled in this prospective study. Patients were randomized to two groups, 1) ACLR using a hamstring tendon autograft (n = 20) or 2) ACLR using artificial LARS (n = 20). Proprioception was assessed with knee joint position sense (JPS) passive-passive test at 45° and 75° flexions, with the contralateral healthy knee as a control baseline to calculate the JPS error. Knee JPS absolute error was used as the main outcome variable and defined as the absolute difference between the reproduction and target angles.
Results
JPS error in both groups at 3 months after ACLR was significantly higher than that at 12 months. However, no significant difference in JPS error was detected between the LARS and autograft groups at either 3 or 12 months after ACLR. Analyzing JPS data by grouping patients according to whether ACLR was performed more or less than 1 year following injury regardless of graft type showed a statistically significant difference between the groups at 3 months, but not at 12 months, after ACLR. Patients receiving the graft within 1 year of injury had a lower JPS error than those receiving the graft more than 1 year after injury at 3 months. No complications were associated with either ACLR method.
Conclusion
ACLR with a hamstring tendon autograft or LARS artificial graft is similarly safe and effective for recovering knee proprioception.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Orthopedics and Sports Medicine,Rheumatology
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献