Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorPersson, Andreasen_US
dc.contributor.authorGifstad, Toneen_US
dc.contributor.authorLind, Martinen_US
dc.contributor.authorEngebretsen, Larsen_US
dc.contributor.authorFjeldsgaard, Knuten_US
dc.contributor.authorDrogset, Jon Olaven_US
dc.contributor.authorForssblad, Magnusen_US
dc.contributor.authorEspehaug, Birgitteen_US
dc.contributor.authorKjellsen, Asleen_US
dc.contributor.authorFevang, Jonas Melingen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-13T12:47:26Z
dc.date.available2018-06-13T12:47:26Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.PublishedPersson A, Gifstad T, Lind M, Engebretsen L, Fjeldsgaard K, Drogset JO, Forssblad M, Espehaug B, Kjellsen A, Fevang JM. Graft fixation influences revision risk after ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autografts : A study of 38,666 patients from the Scandinavian knee ligament registries 2004–2011. Acta Orthopaedica. 2018:89(2):204-210eng
dc.identifier.issn1745-3674
dc.identifier.issn1745-3682
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1956/17797
dc.description.abstractBackground and purpose — A large number of fi xation methods of hamstring tendon autograft (HT) are available for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Some studies report an association between fi xation method and the risk of revision ACLR. We compared the risk of revision of various femoral and tibial fi xation methods used for HT in Scandinavia 2004–2011. Materials and methods — A register-based study of 38,666 patients undergoing primary ACLRs with HT, with 1,042 revision ACLRs. The overall median follow-up time was 2.8 (0–8) years. Fixation devices used in a small number of patients were grouped according to design and the point of fi xation. Results — The most common fi xation methods were Endobutton (36%) and Rigidfi x (31%) in the femur; and interference screw (48%) and Intrafi x (34%) in the tibia. In a multivariable Cox regression model, the transfemoral fi xations Rigidfi x and Transfi x had a lower risk of revision (HR 0.7 [95% CI 0.6–0.8] and 0.7 [CI 0.6–0.9] respectively) compared with Endobutton. In the tibia the retro interference screw had a higher risk of revision (HR 1.9 [CI 1.3–2.9]) compared with an interference screw. Interpretation — The choice of graft fi xation infl uences the risk of revision after primary ACLR with hamstring tendon autograft.en_US
dc.language.isoengeng
dc.publisherTaylor & Franciseng
dc.rightsAttribution CC BY-NCeng
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/eng
dc.titleGraft fixation influences revision risk after ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autografts : A study of 38,666 patients from the Scandinavian knee ligament registries 2004–2011en_US
dc.typePeer reviewed
dc.typeJournal article
dc.date.updated2018-01-19T10:16:58Z
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2017 The Author(s)
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2017.1406243
dc.identifier.cristin1539006
dc.source.journalActa Orthopaedica


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Attribution CC BY-NC
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Attribution CC BY-NC