Intraoperative Incidents and Complications in Primary Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
| Autor: | Arturo Almazán, José Clemente Ibarra, Antonio Miguel, Alberto M Odor |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2006 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction Anterior cruciate ligament medicine.medical_treatment Bone Screws Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Grafting Tendons Arthroscopy medicine Humans Orthopedics and Sports Medicine Femur Anterior Cruciate Ligament Intraoperative Complications Retrospective Studies Fixation (histology) medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Plastic Surgery Procedures Endoscopy Surgery medicine.anatomical_structure Tissue Transplantation Orthopedic surgery Tissue and Organ Harvesting Equipment Failure Range of motion business Hamstring |
| Zdroj: | Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 22:1211-1217 |
| ISSN: | 0749-8063 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.arthro.2006.06.019 |
| Popis: | Purpose: To analyze intraoperative incidents and complications in primary arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) and quadruple hamstring semitendinosus and gracilis (STG) grafts. Methods: From January 1999 to June 2004, we performed 330 BPTB and 96 STG procedures. Intraoperative incidents and complications were recorded for each case. Results: Our overall intraoperative incident and complication rate was 9.6% and was higher in the STG group (13.5%) than in the BPTB group (8.7%). In the BPTB group, combined incidents and complications according to stage of the procedure consisted of graft harvesting, 4 cases (1.21%); tunnel placement, 9 cases (2.7%); and graft fixation, 15 cases (4.5%). In the STG group, combined incidents and complications included graft harvesting, 8 cases (8.3%); tunnel placement, 1 case (1%); graft fixation, 3 cases (3.1%); and others, 1 case (1%). In 4 patients (0.9%), we had to change the technique from BPTB to STG and vice versa. In 2 STG cases, conversion of the technique was required because of graft-related problems; in the third case, it was necessary because of fixation. One BPTB was converted to STG because the graft was completely transected as a result of improper screw fixation technique. Conclusions: None of the encountered incidents and complications had an adverse effect on final stability or on range of motion in operated knees. All incidents and complications were due to technical errors that occurred during graft harvesting, tunnel placement, or graft fixation. It is known that technical errors are preventable if careful surgical technique is followed. The surgeon must be well versed in various reconstruction techniques to be able to detect and resolve forthcoming incidents or complications. Backup implants are mandatory. Level of Evidence: IV, therapeutic case series. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|