Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison of acute and chronic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using LARS artificial ligaments: a randomized prospective study with a 5-year follow-up

  • Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This prospective randomized study compared acute and chronic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS) artificial ligament in young active adults with a 5-year follow-up.

Methods

Fifty-five patients were enrolled in this study and divided into two groups based on the elapsed time between the injury and reconstruction: the acute group (3–7 weeks) and the chronic group (6–11 months). The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Lysholm knee scoring scale, the Tegner activity rating, a KT-1000 Arthrometer, and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scoring system. Isokinetic strength of the quadriceps and hamstring was assessed using the Biodex System 3 isokinetic dynamometer.

Results

Anterior laxity was decreased and quadriceps/hamstring muscle strength was increased in the acute group compared to the chronic group (p > 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in Lysholm scores, Tegner activity scores, and the IKDC evaluation form between the two groups.

Conclusions

These results suggest that earlier ACL reconstruction using a LARS artificial ligament may provide an advantage in the treatment and rehabilitation of ACL rupture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wasilewski SA, Covall DJ, Cohen S (1993) Effect of surgical timing on recovery and associated injuries after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 21(3):338–342

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Andernord D, Karlsson J, Musahl V et al (2013) Timing of surgery of the anterior cruciate ligament. Arthroscopy 29(11):1863–1871

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cipolla M, Scala A, Gianni E et al (1995) Different patterns of meniscal tears in acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures and in chronic ACL-deficient knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 3(3):130–134

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Noyes FR, Barber-Westin SD (1997) A comparison of results in acute and chronic anterior cruciate ligament ruptures of arthroscopically assisted autogenous patellar tendon reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 25(4):460–471

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Goradia VK, Grana WA (2001) A comparison of outcomes at 2 to 6 years after acute and chronic anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions using hamstring tendon grafts. Arthroscopy 17(4):383–392

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Flint JH, Wade AM, Giuliani J et al (2014) Defining the terms acute and chronic in orthopaedic sports injuries: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med 42(1):235–241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Shelbourne KD, Patel DV (1995) Timing of surgery in anterior cruciate ligament-injured knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 3(3):148–156

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nau T, Lavoie P, Duval N (2002) A new generation of artificial ligaments in reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament two-year follow-up of a randomised trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84(3):356–360

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Viateau V, Manassero M, Anagnostou F et al (2013) Biological and biomechanical evaluation of the ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS AC) in a sheep model of anterior cruciate ligament replacement: a 3-month and 12-month study. Arthroscopy 29(6):1079–1088

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lavoie P, Fletcher J, Duval N (2000) Patient satisfaction needs as related to knee stability and objective findings after ACL reconstruction using the LARS artificial ligament. Knee 7(3):157–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ventura A, Terzaghi C, Legnani C et al (2010) Synthetic grafts for anterior cruciate ligament rupture: 19-year outcome study. Knee 17(2):108–113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Parchi PD, Gianluca C, Dolfi L et al (2013) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with LARS™ artificial ligament results at a mean follow-up of eight years. Int Orthop 37(8):1567–1574

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dericks G Jr (1995) Ligament advanced reinforcement system anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Oper Tech Sports Med 3(3):187–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gao K, Chen S, Wang L et al (2010) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with LARS artificial ligament: a multicenter study with 3-to 5-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 26(4):515–523

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Amiel D, Kleiner JB, Roux RD et al (1986) The phenomenon of “ligamentization”: anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autogenous patellar tendon. J Orthop Res 4(2):162–172

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Falconiero RP, DiStefano VJ, Cook TM (1998) Revascularization and ligamentization of autogenous anterior cruciate ligament grafts in humans. Arthroscopy 14(2):197–205

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Liu Z, Zhang X, Jiang Y et al (2010) Four-strand hamstring tendon autograft versus LARS artificial ligament for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Int Orthop 34(1):45–49

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Li B, Wen Y, Wu H et al (2009) Arthroscopic single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: retrospective review of hamstring tendon graft versus LARS artificial ligament. Int Orthop 33(4):991–996

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Pan X, Wen H, Wang L et al (2013) Bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft versus LARS artificial ligament for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 23(7):819–823

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ahn JH, Wang JH, Lee YS et al (2011) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using remnant preservation and a femoral tensioning technique: clinical and magnetic resonance imaging results. Arthroscopy 27(8):1079–1089

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Trieb K, Blahovec H, Brand G et al (2004) In vivo and in vitro cellular ingrowth into a new generation of artificial ligaments. Eur Surg Res 36(3):148–151

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Machotka Z, Scarborough I, Duncan W et al (2010) Anterior cruciate ligament repair with LARS (ligament advanced reinforcement system): a systematic review. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil 2(1):29

    Google Scholar 

  23. Crain EH, Fithian DC, Paxton EW et al (2005) Variation in anterior cruciate ligament scar pattern: does the scar pattern affect anterior laxity in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees? Arthroscopy 21(1):19–24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Åhlén M, Lidén M (2011) A comparison of the clinical outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a hamstring tendon autograft with special emphasis on the timing of the reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(3):488–494

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. de Roeck NJ, Lang-Stevenson A (2003) Meniscal tears sustained awaiting anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Injury 34(5):343–345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Frobell RB, Roos HP, Roos EM et al (2013) Treatment for acute anterior cruciate ligament tear: five year outcome of randomised trial. BMJ 346:f232

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Seto JL, Orofino AS, Morrissey MC et al (1988) Assessment of quadriceps/hamstring strength, knee ligament stability, functional and sports activity levels five years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 16(2):170–178

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Schenck RC, Blaschak MJ, Lance ED et al (1997) A prospective outcome study of rehabilitation programs and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 13(3):285–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

No funds were received in support of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopedic Department, The Affiliated Taizhou People’s Hospital of Nantong University, Taizhou, 225300, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China

    Jia Chen, Aiqun Gu, Haitao Jiang & Wenjie Zhang

  2. Department of Radiology, Huashan Hospital Affiliated to Fudan University, Shanghai, 200040, People’s Republic of China

    Xiangrong Yu

Authors
  1. Jia Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aiqun Gu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Haitao Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wenjie Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xiangrong Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jia Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, J., Gu, A., Jiang, H. et al. A comparison of acute and chronic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using LARS artificial ligaments: a randomized prospective study with a 5-year follow-up. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 135, 95–102 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-014-2108-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-014-2108-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation