Arthroscopic Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament: Comparison between One Day Surgery Care with Remnant Preserving Technique and Conventional Care with Standard Technique
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the outcomes of different methods after arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. The two methods used are: one-day surgery care method, using remnant preserving ACL reconstruction technique, and the conventional care method, using standard ACL reconstruction technique.
Patients and Methods: The sample groups include: patients admitted into the orthopedics department at Chonburi Hospital from September 1st, 2017 to June 30th, 2018. The sample groups were divided into experimental (one day surgery care and remnant preserving ACL reconstruction) group of 30 patients and control (conventional care and standard ACL reconstruction) group with 32 patients. The comparison was made on the basis of: scoring of pain after surgery, costs of hospital care, amount of bleeding in the first 24 hours, surgical operation time, postoperative wound infections, and days admitted in the hospital.
Results: There were significant difference between postoperative pain (p=0.025), costs of hospital care (p=0.00), amount of bleeding in 24 hours (p=0.00), and amount of days admitted in the hospital (p=0.00). However, the operation time and postoperative wound infections, showed no significant differences.
Conclusion: The one-day surgery care, using remnant preserving ACL reconstruction technique, has a better outcome than the conventional care method, using standard ACL reconstruction technique. Furthermore, the one-day surgery care method can be improved and further developed for outpatient care as well.
Article Details
References
2. Sanders TL, MaraditKremers H, Bryan AJ, Larson DR, Dahm DL, Levy BA, et al. Incidence of anterior cruciate ligament tears and reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2016; 44(6): 1502-7.
3. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. July 2007, Anterior cruciate ligament injury : Surgical Consideration, http://orthoinfo.aaos. org/topic.cfm?topic=A00297#A00297_R4_anchor (July11, 2008).
4. Busam ML. Riff A, Back BR Jr. Single – bundle ACL reconstruction tecnique : Bone patellar tendon bone autograft. In : Fu FH, Cohen SB, editors. Current concept in ACL reconstruction. New Jersey : SLACK in corporate; 2008. p. 185-99.
5. Ferrari D, Lopes TJ, França PF, Azevedo FM, Pappas E. Outpatient versus inpatient anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review with meta-analysis. The Knee. 2017;24(2):197-206.
6. Muneta T, Koga H. Anterior cruciate ligament remnant and its value for preservation. Asia Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol. 2016; 7: 1-9.
7. Muneta T, Koga H, Nakamura T, Horie M, Watanabe T, Yagishita K, et al. A new behind-remnant approach for remnant-preserving double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction compared with a standard approach. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015; 23(12): 3743-9.
8. Sutter EG, Anderson JA, Garrett WE Jr. Direct visualization of existing footprint and outside-in drilling of the femoral tunnel in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the knee. Arthrosc Tech. 2015; 4(2): e107-13.
9. Medical Records Section Chon Buri Hospital, Chonburi; 2017.
10. Tipmongkol W, Bhiwattanakul N. Cost analysis of nursing service activities and time services for ACL reconstruction patients in the male Orthopedic surgical ward of Songklanagarind Hospital, Health Management. 2015; 2(2): 20-32.
11. Karaaslan F, Karaoğlu S, Yurdakul E. Reducing intra-articular hemarthrosis after arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by the administration of Intravenous tranexamic acid: A prospective randomized controlledtrail. Am J Sports Med. 2015; 43(11): 2720-6.
12. Lunebourg A, Ollivier M, Delahaye D, Argenson JA, Parratte S. Better satisfaction of patients operated on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in outpatient setting. A prospective comparative monocentric study of 60 cases. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016; 136(12): 1709-15.