1. Endoscopic versus Rear-entry ACL Reconstruction
- Author
-
Laura J. Huston, Michael S George, and Kurt P. Spindler
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Anterior cruciate ligament ,law.invention ,Randomized controlled trial ,law ,medicine ,Humans ,Orthopedic Procedures ,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine ,Anterior Cruciate Ligament ,Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ,Rehabilitation ,medicine.diagnostic_test ,business.industry ,Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries ,General Medicine ,Plastic Surgery Procedures ,Surgery ,Endoscopy ,Treatment Outcome ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Orthopedic surgery ,Physical therapy ,Range of motion ,business ,Hamstring - Abstract
Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is commonly performed using the all-endoscopic (also known as all-inside or single-incision) method or the rear-entry (also known as outside-in or two-incision) method. We report a systematic review of four prospective, randomized clinical trials comparing these two operative techniques. Operative time was shorter in the all-endoscopic groups in two studies. A higher percentage of patients in the rear-entry group had a difference of 3 mm or less on the KT-2000 arthrometer, although the two surgical techniques were similar in the other studies. A higher rate of return to full activity was achieved in patients undergoing the rear-entry technique in one study. All four studies were similar in pain medication used, progression of rehabilitation, range of motion, quadriceps or hamstring strength, patellofemoral pain, one-leg hop test, Lysholm, Tegner, and International Knee Documentation Committee scores. Overall, these studies show similar outcomes comparing the all-endoscopic and rear-entry anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques.
- Published
- 2007
- Full Text
- View/download PDF