A Randomized Trial Comparing Patellar, Hamstring and Double-bundle ACL Reconstruction at 5-yrs
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives: This prospective, double-blind RCT compares ACL reconstruction using patellar tendon, quadruple hamstring and double-bundle hamstring grafts, by measuring patient-reported disease-specific quality of life outcome in patients with isolated ACL deficiency of the knee at a 5-years post-op. Methods: Patients (n=330; 183 males, 147 females) aged 14-50 years were randomly allocated and equally distributed to one of three anatomic ACL autograft reconstruction techniques: 1) Patellar Tendon (PT; mean age 28.7 years), 2) Quadruple-stranded Hamstring Tendon (HT; mean age 28.5 years), or 3) Double-Bundle using hamstring tendons (DB; mean age 28.3 years). Computer-generated allocation with varied block randomization was performed intra-operatively. Outcomes were measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months, 1, 2 and 5 years. Two-year results were previously reported. Primary outcome: Anterior Cruciate Ligament Quality-of-Life (ACL-QOL). Secondary outcomes: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score and objective grades, pivot shift, range of motion, kneeling pain, Tegner activity level, and the Cincinnati Occupational Rating Scale. The proportion of re-ruptures, partial re-ruptures and the combined total traumatic re-injuries were compared. Radiographic evaluation was performed at baseline, 2 and 5 years; this analysis is ongoing. A 5% significance level was used for all outcomes. Results: 315 randomized patients (95%) d 5-yr follow-up. There were 4 withdrawals and 11 patients lost-to-follow-up. Baseline characteristics between the groups were not different. ACL-QOL scores increased significantly from baseline over time for all groups (p=0.000). There was no difference in mean ACL-QOL score at 5-years (p=0.548): PT=82.5 (SD 17.9, 95% CI 79.0-86.0); HT=83.9 (SD 18.2, 95% CI 80.3-87.4); DB=81.1 (SD 19.3, 95% CI 77.4-84.8). At 5-years, there were no differences in the proportion of patients with a Pivot Shift grade 2 or greater (p=0.106): PT=11/98 (11%); HT=16/99 (16%); DB=23/103 (22%). Mean IKDC subjective scores were not different between groups at 5-yrs (p=0.770): PT=83.9 (SD 12.9, 95% CI = 81.4-86.5); HT=85.2 (SD 13.0, 95% CI = 82.7-87.7); DB=84.3 (SD 13.4, 95% CI = 81.7-86.9). Based on IKDC objective grades, the proportions of Normal/Nearly Normal knees at 5-years were not different between groups: PT=85/98 (87%); HT=82/99 (81%); DB=75/103 (76%), p=0.093. 5-yr Tegner activity levels and Cincinnati Occupational Scores were also not different between the groups (p=0.872 and p=0.813, respectively). Kneeling pain remained more common in the PT group (PT=10/98; HT 4/98; DB 2/101; p=0.029). More traumatic graft ruptures occurred in the HT and DB groups (PT=4/103; HT=11/105; DB=11/107; p=0.145). Revision ACL reconstructions were performed on 22 of these patients. There were an additional 11 partial graft re-ruptures (PT=0; HT=5; DB=6), with less total traumatic re-injuries in the patellar tendon group (PT=4; HT=16 and DB=17, p=0.010). Four patients had additional surgery to the index knee, not including the revision surgery between the 2 and 5-yr follow-up. Conclusion: At 5 years, there was no difference in disease-specific quality-of-life outcome or IKDC grades between the PT, HT and DB techniques for ACL reconstruction. There were significantly more traumatic graft re-injuries in the HT and DB groups compared to the PT group.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».