To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Two laxity based graft tension protocols produce similar results during ACL Reconstruction

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
April 2013

Two laxity based graft tension protocols produce similar results during ACL Reconstruction

Vol: 2| Issue: 3| Number:34| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

The effect of initial graft tension after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized clinical trial with 36-month follow-up

Am J Sports Med. 2013 Jan;41(1):25-34. doi: 10.1177/0363546512464200. Epub 2012 Nov 9

Contributing Authors:
BC Fleming PD Fadale MJ Hulstyn RM Shalvoy HL Oksendahl GJ Badger GA Tung

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

90 patients, undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, were randomised to receive the surgery using different graft tension procedures, to compare the clinical, functional, and osteoarthritis (OA) imaging outcomes. One group had anterior posterior (AP) laxity returned by means of low autograft tension, while the other had high autograft tension. The two groups were then compared ...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue