Effectiveness comparison of LARS artificial ligament and autogenous hamstring tendon in one-stage reconstruction of anterior and posterior cruciate ligaments_Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

Authors：

LI Yu ^1,2 , ZHANG Hao ³ , XIAO Shizhuo ¹ , ZHENG Qiu ¹ , ZENG Yalan ¹ ,  YANG Hongbin ¹

1. Department of Bone and Joint Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou Sichuan, 646000, P.R.China;
2. Department of Orthopedics, the First People’s Hospital of Yibin, Yibin Sichuan, 644000, P.R.China;
3. Department of Orthopedics, People’s Hospital of Linshui, Linshui Sichuan, 638500, P.R.China;

Corresponding?author：

YANG Hongbin, Email: yanghongbin1234@163.com

Keywords：

Arthroscopy; LARS artificial ligament; autogenous hamstring tendon; anterior cruciate ligament; posterior cruciate ligament; joint function reconstruction

DOI：

10.7507/1002-1892.201908051

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To compare the effectiveness of arthroscopic one-stage reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) with LARS artificial ligament and autogenous hamstring tendon, respectively.Methods A retrospective study was performed on 23 patients with ACL and PCL injuries, who were treated with one-stage reconstruction, between June 2013 and June 2017. The ACL and PCL were reconstructed with LARS artificial ligament in 11 patients (artificial ligament group) and autogenous hamstring tendon in 12 patients (autogenous tendon group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, side of injury, cause of injury, time from injury to operation, and preoperative Lysholm score and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score between the two groups (P>0.05). The operation time, the time of recovery of daily activities and preoperative exercise level, the occurrence of surgical-related complications, Lysholm score, IKDC score, and the results of knee stability assessment were recorded and compared between the two groups.Results The operation time and the time of recovery of daily activities and preoperative exercise level were significantly shorter in artificial ligament group than in autogenous tendon group (P<0.05). All incisions healed primarily. In autogenous tendon group, the common fibular nerve injury occurred in 1 case and intermuscular vein thrombosis occurred in 1 case. No complication occurred in the remaining patients of the two groups. All the patients were followed up 24-54 months (mean, 36.4 months). At last follow-up, the Lysholm score and IKDC score of the two groups were significantly higher than preoperative scores (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). The varus and valgus stress tests of the two groups were negative. There was no significant difference in anterior drawer test, posterior drawer test, and Lachman test between the two groups (P>0.05).Conclusion The effectiveness of arthroscopic one-stage reconstruction of ACL and PCL with LARS artificial ligament or autogenous hamstring tendon was similar. The knee function and stability recover well. But the patients with LARS artificial ligament reconstruction can resume daily activities and return to exercise earlier.

Citation： LI Yu, ZHANG Hao, XIAO Shizhuo, ZHENG Qiu, ZENG Yalan, YANG Hongbin. Effectiveness comparison of LARS artificial ligament and autogenous hamstring tendon in one-stage reconstruction of anterior and posterior cruciate ligaments. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 2020, 34(8): 1018-1024. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.201908051 Copy

1.	Denti M, Tornese D, Melegati G, et al. Combined chronic anterior cruciate ligament and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: functional and clinical results. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2015, 23(10): 2853-2858.
2.	Zheng L, Sabzevari S, Marshall B, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation first in anterior and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction best restores knee kinematics. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2018, 26(4): 1237-1244.
3.	Panigrahi R, Kumari Mahapatra A, Priyadarshi A, et al. Outcome of simultaneous arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendon autograft: A multicenter prospective study. Asian J Sports Med, 2016, 7(1): e29287.
4.	Ohkoshi Y, Nagasaki S, Shibata N, et al. Two-stage reconstruction with autografts for knee dislocations. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2002, (398): 169-175.
5.	Stannard J, Bauer KL. Current concepts in knee dislocations: PCL, ACL, and medial sided injuries. J Knee Surg, 2012, 25(4): 287-294.
6.	白曉東, 王耀霆, 車琦, 等. 膝關節鏡全內技術自體腘繩肌腱移植一期重建前、后十字韌帶斷裂. 中華骨科雜志, 2018, 38(17): 1045-1054.
7.	陳薊, 劉弼. LARS 人工韌帶關節鏡下一期同時重建前、后交叉韌帶的近期療效分析. 中華創傷骨科雜志, 2017, 19(8): 727-729.
8.	Buyukdogan K, Laidlaw MS, Miller MD. Surgical management of the multiple-ligament knee injury. Arthrosc Tech, 2018, 7(2): e147-e164.
9.	Woodmass JM, Johnson NR, Mohan R, et al. Poly-traumatic multi-ligament knee injuries: is the knee the limiting factor? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2018, 26(9): 2865-2871.
10.	Sun L, Wu B, Tian M, et al. Results of multiple ligament injured knees operated by three different strategies. Indian J Orthop, 2016, 50(1): 43-48.
11.	孔穎, 王雷, 張元民, 等. 關節鏡下保留殘端自體腘繩肌腱同期單束重建前后交叉韌帶療效觀察. 中國矯形外科雜志, 2015, 23(2): 113-118.
12.	Sanders TL, Johnson NR, Levy NM, et al. Effect of vascular injury on functional outcome in knees with multi-ligament injury. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 2017, 99(18): 1565-1571.
13.	代朋乙, 黃昌林. 關節鏡下一期修復重建膝關節多發韌帶損傷的療效觀察. 解放軍醫學雜志, 2019, 44(1): 57-62.
14.	李書振, 王豪, 韓杰, 等. 關節鏡下早期與晚期自體肌腱重建前交叉韌帶的對比研究. 中國組織工程研究, 2019, 23(26): 4170-4174.
15.	孫正宇, 張承昊, 唐新, 等. 一期修復重建膝關節脫位多發韌帶損傷的療效觀察. 中國修復重建外科雜志, 2016, 30(6): 690-694.
16.	劉華, 狄正林, 章軍輝, 等. 關節鏡下一期自體腘繩肌腱重建前交叉韌帶聯合 LARS 韌帶重建后交叉韌帶. 中國骨與關節損傷雜志, 2014, 29(12): 1227-1229.
17.	Bianchi N, Sacchetti F, Bottai V, et al. LARS versus hamstring tendon autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a single-centre, single surgeon retrospective study with 8 years of follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Trauma, 2019, 29(2): 447-453.
18.	Cantivalli A, Rosso F, Bonasia DE, et al. High tibial osteotomy and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction/revision. Clin Sports Med, 2019, 38(3): 417-433.
19.	Dejour D, Saffarini M, Demey G, et al. Tibial slope correction combined with second revision ACL produces good knee stability and prevents graft rupture. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2015, 23(10): 2846-2852.
20.	柳海峰, 陸偉, 梁達強, 等. 大腿肌群等速訓練對前交叉韌帶重建術后移植物塑形的影響. 中國修復重建外科雜志, 2019, 33(9): 1088-1094.

1. Denti M, Tornese D, Melegati G, et al. Combined chronic anterior cruciate ligament and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: functional and clinical results. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2015, 23(10): 2853-2858.
2. Zheng L, Sabzevari S, Marshall B, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation first in anterior and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction best restores knee kinematics. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2018, 26(4): 1237-1244.
3. Panigrahi R, Kumari Mahapatra A, Priyadarshi A, et al. Outcome of simultaneous arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendon autograft: A multicenter prospective study. Asian J Sports Med, 2016, 7(1): e29287.
4. Ohkoshi Y, Nagasaki S, Shibata N, et al. Two-stage reconstruction with autografts for knee dislocations. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2002, (398): 169-175.
5. Stannard J, Bauer KL. Current concepts in knee dislocations: PCL, ACL, and medial sided injuries. J Knee Surg, 2012, 25(4): 287-294.
6. 白曉東, 王耀霆, 車琦, 等. 膝關節鏡全內技術自體腘繩肌腱移植一期重建前、后十字韌帶斷裂. 中華骨科雜志, 2018, 38(17): 1045-1054.
7. 陳薊, 劉弼. LARS 人工韌帶關節鏡下一期同時重建前、后交叉韌帶的近期療效分析. 中華創傷骨科雜志, 2017, 19(8): 727-729.
8. Buyukdogan K, Laidlaw MS, Miller MD. Surgical management of the multiple-ligament knee injury. Arthrosc Tech, 2018, 7(2): e147-e164.
9. Woodmass JM, Johnson NR, Mohan R, et al. Poly-traumatic multi-ligament knee injuries: is the knee the limiting factor? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2018, 26(9): 2865-2871.
10. Sun L, Wu B, Tian M, et al. Results of multiple ligament injured knees operated by three different strategies. Indian J Orthop, 2016, 50(1): 43-48.
11. 孔穎, 王雷, 張元民, 等. 關節鏡下保留殘端自體腘繩肌腱同期單束重建前后交叉韌帶療效觀察. 中國矯形外科雜志, 2015, 23(2): 113-118.
12. Sanders TL, Johnson NR, Levy NM, et al. Effect of vascular injury on functional outcome in knees with multi-ligament injury. J Bone Joint Surg (Br), 2017, 99(18): 1565-1571.
13. 代朋乙, 黃昌林. 關節鏡下一期修復重建膝關節多發韌帶損傷的療效觀察. 解放軍醫學雜志, 2019, 44(1): 57-62.
14. 李書振, 王豪, 韓杰, 等. 關節鏡下早期與晚期自體肌腱重建前交叉韌帶的對比研究. 中國組織工程研究, 2019, 23(26): 4170-4174.
15. 孫正宇, 張承昊, 唐新, 等. 一期修復重建膝關節脫位多發韌帶損傷的療效觀察. 中國修復重建外科雜志, 2016, 30(6): 690-694.
16. 劉華, 狄正林, 章軍輝, 等. 關節鏡下一期自體腘繩肌腱重建前交叉韌帶聯合 LARS 韌帶重建后交叉韌帶. 中國骨與關節損傷雜志, 2014, 29(12): 1227-1229.
17. Bianchi N, Sacchetti F, Bottai V, et al. LARS versus hamstring tendon autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a single-centre, single surgeon retrospective study with 8 years of follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Trauma, 2019, 29(2): 447-453.
18. Cantivalli A, Rosso F, Bonasia DE, et al. High tibial osteotomy and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction/revision. Clin Sports Med, 2019, 38(3): 417-433.
19. Dejour D, Saffarini M, Demey G, et al. Tibial slope correction combined with second revision ACL produces good knee stability and prevents graft rupture. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2015, 23(10): 2846-2852.
20. 柳海峰, 陸偉, 梁達強, 等. 大腿肌群等速訓練對前交叉韌帶重建術后移植物塑形的影響. 中國修復重建外科雜志, 2019, 33(9): 1088-1094.

Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery

Effectiveness comparison of LARS artificial ligament and autogenous hamstring tendon in one-stage reconstruction of anterior and posterior cruciate ligaments

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content