Restricted accessReplyFirst published online 2024-7
Favorable Patient-Reported,Clinical,and Functional Outcomes 2 Years After ACL Repair and InternalBrace Augmentation Compared With ACL Reconstruction and Healthy Controls: Response
BatistaJPMaestuRBarbierJChahlaJKunzeKN. Propensity for clinically meaningful improvement and surgical failure after anterior cruciate ligament repair. Orthop J Sports Med. 2023;11(4):23259671221146815.
2.
DouoguihWAApseloffNAMurrayJCKellyRLSvobodaSJ. Suture-augmented anterior cruciate ligament repair for proximal avulsion or high-grade partial tears shows similar side-to-side difference and no clinical differences at two years versus conventional anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for mid-substance tears or poor anterior cruciate ligament tissue quality. Arthroscopy. 2024;40(3):857-867.
3.
DuongJKHBoltonCMurphyGTFritschBA. Anterior cruciate ligament repair versus reconstruction: a clinical, MRI and patient-reported outcome comparison. Knee. 2023;45:100-109.
4.
FerreiraASaithnaACarrozzoA, et al. The minimal clinically important difference, Patient Acceptable Symptom State, and clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament repair versus reconstruction: a matched-pair analysis from the SANTI Study Group. Am J Sports Med. 2022;50(13):3522-3532.
5.
HarboTBrincksJAndersenH. Maximal isokinetic and isometric muscle strength of major muscle groups related to age, body mass, height, and sex in 178 healthy subjects. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012;112(1):267-275.
6.
HopperGPWilsonWTO’DonnellLHamiltonCBlythMJGMacKayGM. Comparable rates of secondary surgery between anterior cruciate ligament repair with suture tape augmentation and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Exp Orthop. 2022;9(1):115.
7.
HouckDAKraeutlerMJBelkJWGoodeJAMulcaheyMKBravmanJT. Primary arthroscopic repair of the anterior cruciate ligament: a systematic review of clinical outcomes. Arthroscopy. 2019;35(12): 3318-3327.
8.
LeisterIKulnikSTKindermannH, et al. Functional performance testing and return to sport criteria in patients after anterior cruciate ligament injury 12-18 months after index surgery: a cross-sectional observational study. Phys Ther Sport. 2019;37:1-9.
9.
LopesTJASimicMAlvesDS, et al. Physical performance measures of flexibility, hip strength, lower limb power, and trunk endurance in healthy navy cadets: normative data and differences between sex and limb dominance. J Strength Cond Res. 2021;35(2):458-464.
10.
LysholmJGillquistJ. Evaluation of knee ligament surgery results with special emphasis on use of a scoring scale. Am J Sports Med. 1982;10(3):150-154.
11.
MattiassichGOrtmaierRKindermannH, et al. Klinische und radiologische Ergebnisse nach Naht des vorderen Kreuzbandes mittels Internal-Brace- und All-inside-Kreuzbandersatzplastik nach 12–18 Monaten nach Operation. Clinical and radiological results after Internal Brace suture versus the all-inside reconstruction technique in anterior cruciate ligament tears 12 to 18 months after index surgery. Sportverletz Sportschaden. 2021;35(2):103-114.
12.
MeisterMKochJAmslerFArnoldMPHirschmannMT. ACL suturing using dynamic intraligamentary stabilisation showing good clinical outcome but a high reoperation rate: a retrospective independent study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(2):655-659.
13.
MüllerSBühlLNüeschCPagenstertGMündermannAEgloffC. RetroBRACE: clinical, socioeconomic and functional-biomechanical outcomes 2 years after ACL repair and InternalBrace augmentation in comparison to ACL reconstruction and healthy controls—experimental protocol of a non-randomised single-centre comparative study. BMJ Open. 2022;12(2):e054709.
14.
OrtmaierRFinkCSchobersbergerW, et al. Rückkehr zum Sport nach Ruptur des vorderen Kreuzbandes. Eine Matched-paired-Studie nach Kreuzbandnaht mittels Internal Brace und Ersatzplastik mittels Hamstring- oder Quadrizepssehne. Return to sports after anterior cruciate ligament injury: a matched-pair analysis of repair with Internal Brace and reconstruction using hamstring or quadriceps tendons. Sportverletz Sportschaden. 2021;35(1):36-44.
15.
RandsborgP-HCepedaNAdamecDRodeoSARanawatAPearleAD. Patient-reported outcome, return to sport, and revision rates 7-9 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from a cohort of 2042 patients. Am J Sports Med. 2022;50(2):423-432.
16.
RilkSGoodhartGCO’BrienRVermeijdenHDvan der ListJPDiFeliceGS. Anatomic arthroscopic primary repair of proximal anterior cruciate ligament tears. Arthrosc Tech. 2023;12(6):e879-e888. doi:10.1016/j.eats.2023.02.022
17.
SchneiderKNSchliemannBGoshegerG, et al. Good to excellent functional short-term outcome and low revision rates following primary anterior cruciate ligament repair using suture augmentation. J Clin Med. 2020;9(10):3068. doi:10.3390/jcm9103068
18.
SzwedowskiDPaczesnyŁZabrzyńskiJ, et al. The comparison of clinical result between primary repair of the anterior cruciate ligament with additional internal bracing and anatomic single bundle reconstruction—a retrospective study. J Clin Med. 2021;10(17):3948.
19.
TanSHSLauBPHKhinLWLingarajK. The importance of patient sex in the outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2016;44(1):242-254.
20.
van der ListJPDiFeliceGS. Range of motion and complications following primary repair versus reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Knee. 2017;24(4):798-807.
21.
VermeijdenHDvan der ListJPBennerJLRademakersMVKerkhoffsGMMJDiFeliceGS. Primary repair with suture augmentation for proximal anterior cruciate ligament tears: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Knee. 2022;38:19-29.
22.
VermeijdenHDvan der ListJPO’BrienRDiFeliceGS. Patients forget about their operated knee more following arthroscopic primary repair of the anterior cruciate ligament than following reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2020;36(3):797-804.
23.
YangS-JDingZ-JLiJXueYChenG. Factors influencing postoperative outcomes in patients with symptomatic discoid lateral meniscus. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020;21(1):551.
