These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A prospective comparison of 3 hamstring ACL fixation devices--Rigidfix, BioScrew, and Intrafix--randomized into 4 groups with 2 years of follow-up.
    Author: Harilainen A, Sandelin J.
    Journal: Am J Sports Med; 2009 Apr; 37(4):699-706. PubMed ID: 19188561.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: New devices for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction are released to clinical use without clinical follow-up data. HYPOTHESIS: There is similar clinical outcome after either cross-pin or absorbable interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendons. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 120 patients were randomized into 4 different groups (30 each) for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendons: femoral Rigidfix cross-pin and Intrafix tibial expansion sheath with a tapered expansion screw; Rigidfix femoral and BioScrew interference screw tibial fixation, BioScrew femoral and Intrafix tibial fixation; or BioScrew fixation into both tunnels. The evaluation methods were clinical examination, knee scores, and instrumented laxity measurements. RESULTS: Ten patients were completely lost to follow-up and 3 revisions were done before the 2-year follow-up, leaving 107 of 120 (89%) patients for analysis. No statistically significant differences between the groups were seen 2 years postoperatively, and all but 2 patients in the Rigidfix/Intrafix and Rigidfix/BioScrew groups, respectively, were classified into International Knee Documentation Committee A or B categories. A revision reconstruction was performed before the 2-year follow-up in 2 cases after a high-energy injury caused a rerupture (1 in Rigidfix/Intrafix and 1 in BioScrew/BioScrew groups). In addition, there were 4 nontraumatic failures revised before the 2-year follow-up (2 in Rigidfix/Intrafix and 1 each in Rigidfix/BioScrew and BioScrew/BioScrew). CONCLUSION: There were no statistically or clinically relevant differences in the results 2 years postoperatively, and all 4 techniques improved patient performance.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]