2025 ISAKOS Biennial Congress ePoster
Clinical And Radiological Outcomes Of The Anatomic Single Bundle Acl Reconstruction (Sb-Aclr) With A Novel Modified All-Inside Double Bundle Acl Reconstruction Technique Using Single Tibial Socket And Two Femoral Sockets (Db- Aclr)
Vinod Kumar, MBBS, MS, DNB, MNAMS, New Delhi, New Delhi INDIA
Teja Prashanth Rongali , MBBS, MS (Ortho), DNB, New Delhi, Delhi INDIA
Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi, New Delhi, INDIA
FDA Status Not Applicable
Summary
Evaluation and comparision of clinical and radiological outcomes of the anatomic single bundle ACL reconstruction (SB-ACLR) with a novel modified all-inside double bundle ACL reconstruction technique using single tibial socket and two femoral sockets (DB- ACLR)
ePosters will be available shortly before Congress
Abstract
Objective
To evaluate and compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of the anatomic single bundle ACL reconstruction (SB-ACLR) with a novel modified all-inside double bundle ACL reconstruction technique using single tibial socket and two femoral sockets (DB- ACLR).
Materials And Methods
This was a prospective, single-centre, single-surgeon, interventional study. A total of 40 patients were included in this study and were segregated into two groups (20 each). The average follow-up duration was about 12 months in both the comparison groups. Clinical examination, KT-2000 arthrometer measurements (side-to-side-differences), IKDC, Lysholm, and Tegner scores were used to evaluate the function of the knee joint during the pre-operative and post-operative period. Radiological parameters of tunnel dilation and ligamentization were also assessed in both groups.
Results
The postoperative Lysholm, IKDC and Tegner scores improved significantly in both groups with a greater improvement in DB- ACLR group (insignificant, P>0.05). The Lachman test positivity rate, Anterior drawer test positivity rate and pivot shift test positivity rate, and KT-2000 measured anterior knee laxity (2.8±1.05 vs. 5.90±1.91mm in the SB-ACLR group; 1.56±1.22 vs 4.70±1.70mm in the DB- ACLR group) were significantly reduced post-operatively in both groups (P < 0.05). However, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups at the final follow-up (P > 0.05). Tunnel dilatation (with more widening in SB-ACLR group P<0.0.5) and good ligamentization was observed in both groups.
Conclusion
This DB- ACLR technique achieved a satisfactory clinical outcome with better rotational stability compared to the traditional SB-ACLR technique. Long term follow-up studies with larger sample sizes maybe needed to draw definite comparisons.