Gelişmiş Arama

Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorZehir, Sinan
dc.contributor.authorŞahin, Ercan
dc.contributor.authorSongur, Murat
dc.contributor.authorKalem, Mahmut
dc.date.accessioned2019-05-13T09:02:35Z
dc.date.available2019-05-13T09:02:35Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationZehir, S., Şahin, E., Songür, M., Kalem, M. (2016). Conventional trans‑tibial versus anatomic medial portal technique for femoral tunnel preparation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; comparison of clinical outcomes. Nigerian Journal of Clinical Practice, 19(4), 475-479.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1119-3077
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.4103/1119-3077.183304
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11491/1284
dc.description.abstractAim: Method of femoral tunnel preparation in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is controversial. In this study, we aimed to determine if there is any difference between the clinical outcomes of two most commonly used drilling techniques; which are conventional trans-tibial (TT) drilling of femoral tunnel and anatomic preparation of femoral tunnel through medial portal (MP), in patients who underwent ACL reconstruction. Material and Methods: One hundred and twenty-nine male patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between 2010 and 2012 were included in the study. Single-bundle reconstruction with a quadrupled autologous hamstring graft was performed in all patients. Femoral tunnel was drilled by the conventional TT technique in 58 patients (Group 1) and through MP in 71 patients (Group 2). Functional evaluation was made about 12 months postoperatively. Functional evaluation included the Lysholm Knee Scale, International Knee Documentation Committee Scoring (IKDC), and Tegner Activity Level Scale were used for assessment. The anteroposterior stability was assessed using KT-1000 arthrometer and the pivot shift test for assessment of rotational stability. Results: Interval between injury and surgery was similar between two groups (median 8.0 vs. 10 weeks, for TT vs. MP, respectively). One hundred twenty-five patients attending the final follow-up examination (96.8%) were evaluated. The results of Lysholm, IKDC, and Tegner scales were found to be similar. According to KT-1000 arthrometer results, MP group revealed slightly better results than TT group. Regarding pivot shift, MP group showed significantly better stability than TT group (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The anatomical single-bundle femoral tunnel preparation in the reconstruction of the ACL seems as effective as the conventional technique in terms of functional stability in the midterm. The technique better preserved the rotational stability in non-professional athletes.en_US
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherMedknow Publicationsen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.4103/1119-3077.183304en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectAnterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructionen_US
dc.subjectArthroscopyen_US
dc.subjectMedial Portalen_US
dc.subjectTrans-Tibialen_US
dc.titleConventional trans-tibial versus anatomic medial portal technique for femoral tunnel preparation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; Comparison of clinical outcomesen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.journalNigerian Journal of Clinical Practiceen_US
dc.departmentHitit Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Bölümüen_US
dc.identifier.volume19en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.startpage475en_US
dc.identifier.endpage479en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster