首页> 外文期刊>Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine >The impact of fixation methods on the risk of revision in ACL reconstruction - a study from the Scandinavian ACL registries, 2004-2011
【24h】

The impact of fixation methods on the risk of revision in ACL reconstruction - a study from the Scandinavian ACL registries, 2004-2011

机译:固定方法对ACL重建中翻修风险的影响-来自斯堪的纳维亚ACL注册表的研究,2004-2011年

获取原文
           

摘要

Aims and Objectives: The hamstring autograft is one of the most common grafts used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and a large number of fixation methods are available. There are no studies investigating the risk of revision for specific fixation devices. Revision ACLR is a relatively rare event and large registry-based prospective studies make it possible to analyze differences in risk of revision according to clinical and demographic factors. The aim of the present registry-based study was to describe the current use of fixation method and to compare risk of revision between various femoral and tibial fixation methods in Scandinavia during the study period. Materials and Methods: A total of 38 666 patients undergoing primary ACL reconstructions in the period 2004-2011 were included in the present study. Less frequently used fixation devices were grouped according to the point of graft fixation. To compare the risk of revision between various fixation methods, the multiple Cox proportional hazard (PH) regression model was applied. Hazard rate ratios (HR with 95% confidence interval (CI)) were reported as measure of effect. Results: The median follow-up time was 3 years (range 0 to 8 years). The present data included a total of 1042 revision ACL reconstructions. Based on a Cox PH regression model stratified for country and mutual adjustment for gender, age at surgery (five-year categories), activity at the time when the primary injury occurred, femoral fixation and tibial fixation, we found a significantly lower risk of revision for the transfemoral fixation devices Rigidfix (0.7 (0.6-0.8)) and Transfix (0.7 (0.6-0.9)) compared with the cortical device Endobutton (ref.). The same model showed that a retro interference screw used for tibial fixation had a higher risk of revision (1.9 (1.3-2.9)) compared with a standard interference screw (ref.). Conclusion: In view of the findings in the present study, both femoral and tibial fixation method of hamstring autografts seem to be of significance when evaluating the risk of revision.
机译:目的和目的:ham绳肌自体移植是用于前十字韧带重建(ACLR)的最常见移植物之一,并且有许多固定方法可供使用。没有研究调查特定固定装置的翻修风险。修订ACLR是相对罕见的事件,基于注册管理机构的大型前瞻性研究使根据临床和人口统计学因素分析修订风险的差异成为可能。当前基于注册表的研究的目的是描述在研究期间斯堪的那维亚的固定方法的当前使用并比较各种股骨和胫骨固定方法之间的翻修风险。资料与方法:本研究共纳入了2004年至2011年间接受原发性ACL重建的38666名患者。较不常用的固定装置根据移植物固定点分组。为了比较各种固定方法之间翻修的风险,应用了多个Cox比例风险(PH)回归模型。危险率比率(HR为95%置信区间(CI))被报告为效果的度量。结果:中位随访时间为3年(范围为0至8年)。当前数据包括总共1042个修订版ACL重建。基于针对国家分层的Cox PH回归模型,以及性别,手术年龄(五年类别),原发性损伤发生时的活动,股骨固定和胫骨固定的相互调整,我们发现翻修风险明显降低股骨固定装置Rigidfix(0.7(0.6-0.8))和Transfix(0.7(0.6-0.9))与皮质装置Endobutton相比(参考)。同一模型显示,与标准干涉螺钉相比,用于胫骨固定的逆行干涉螺钉具有更高的翻修风险(1.9(1.3-2.9))。结论:鉴于目前的研究结果,,绳肌自体移植的股骨和胫骨固定方法在评估翻修风险时似乎具有重要意义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号