NCT02555917

Comparison of Remnant Preserving Versus Remnant Resecting Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Tibia and Femoral Tunnel Location Comparison of Remnant Preserving Versus Remnant Resecting Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

• Status: Unknown
• Phase: N/A
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 40 (estimated)
• Sponsor: The Catholic University of Korea · Academic / Other
• Sex: All
• Age: 19 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

Anterior cruciate ligament injury is very common knee injury. Especially Anterior cruciate ligament complete rupture leads to knee joint instability and degenerative change of the knee. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is performed for resolving these problems and it gives excellent results. For leading to successful result of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, selecting of appropriate femoral tunnel and tibial tunnel is necessary. If selecting inappropriate tibial tunnel location makes pain, synovitis, impingement of transplanted tendon, loss of range of motion, instability, failure of transplantation and risk of arthritis. It is known that selection of inappropriate tibial tunnel location is the most common cause of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failure. Recently many studies reconstructed at anatomical lesion instead of isometric point. And some cadaver studies reported that tibial insertion of anterior cruciate ligament has "C" shape. There are two methods for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. One is preserving remnant and the other is removing remnant. This study aims to compare the tibia and femoral tunnel location of remnant preserving and remnant resecting anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Detailed description

The study design is a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Randomly, twenty patients planed to undergo anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autograft by remnant preserving and other twenty patients undergo anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autograft by resecting anterior cruciate ligament. The clinical outcome is comparative preoperative, postoperative 6weeks, 3months, 6months and 1years. And clinical score consists of Visual Analog Score, lachman test, anterior laxity, Lysholm knee score, international knee documentation committee score. Femoral and tibial tunnel location will be analyzed by three-dimensional computed tomography using Bernard quadrant method after surgery. The present study aimed to determine and compare (1) the accuracy of tibia and femoral tunnel location and (2) postoperative functional outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction between remnant preserving group versus remnant resecting group.

Conditions

• Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
PROCEDURE	anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction	Twenty patients planed to undergo anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by preserving remnant and other twenty patients undergo anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by preserving remnant.

Timeline

• Start date: 2015-09-01
• Primary completion: 2016-09-01
• Completion: 2017-09-01
• First posted: 2015-09-22
• Last updated: 2015-09-22