Publication:
Clinical outcomes of double- vs single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review of randomized control trials

dc.contributor.authorJ. Kongtharvonskulen_US
dc.contributor.authorJ. Attiaen_US
dc.contributor.authorS. Thamakaisonen_US
dc.contributor.authorC. Kijkunasathianen_US
dc.contributor.authorP. Woratanaraten_US
dc.contributor.authorA. Thakkinstianen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Newcastle Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciencesen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-19T04:59:15Z
dc.date.available2018-10-19T04:59:15Z
dc.date.issued2013-02-01en_US
dc.description.abstractClinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with double-bundle and single-bundle techniques are still controversial. We therefore performed a systematic review to compare postoperative outcomes between the two techniques. Randomized control trials comparing the outcomes between the two techniques were identified from Medline and EMBASE since inception to April 27, 2011. Data were independently extracted by two reviewers. Thirteen of 318 studies were eligible; 9, 11, 7, and 8 studies were pooled for rotation, translation, function, and complication outcomes, respectively. The double-bundle technique was approximately four times (95% CI: 2.65, 11.99) and two times (95% CI: 1.16, 5.21) more likely to show a normal pivot shift and normal International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) grading compared with the single-bundle technique. However, there were nonsignificant differences in KT grading (OR=1.66, 95% CI: 0.77, 3.82), IKDC score (0.29, 95% CI: -1.17, 1.75), Lysholm knee score (-0.87, 95% CI: -2.66, 0.93), Tegner activity score (0.37, 95% CI: -0.05, 0.79), and complications (OR=1.11, 95% CI: 0.48, 2.57). Heterogeneity was present in some outcomes but there was no evidence of publication bias for any outcome. The double-bundle may be better than the single-bundle ACL reconstruction technique in rotational stability but not for function, translation, and complications. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.en_US
dc.identifier.citationScandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports. Vol.23, No.1 (2013), 1-14en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1600-0838.2011.01439.xen_US
dc.identifier.issn16000838en_US
dc.identifier.issn09057188en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84872300770en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/31817
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84872300770&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectHealth Professionsen_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleClinical outcomes of double- vs single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review of randomized control trialsen_US
dc.typeReviewen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84872300770&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections