title: Comparison of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with preservation only versus remnant tensioning technique.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate the stability and functional outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction by tensioning of the ACL remnant using pullout sutures compared with a remnant preservation technique only.
  
  
  METHODS
  The data of 33 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction by a remnant tensioning technique (tensioning group) were reviewed retrospectively and compared with the data of 43 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with remnant preservation without tensioning (preservation-only group) from September 2004 to April 2008 with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. The stability and function were assessed from the side-to-side difference with a KT-1000 arthrometer (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA) and Telos device (Austin & Associates, Fallston, MD), as well as International Knee Documentation Committee and Orthopadische Arbeitsgruppe Knie scores.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to the subjective and objective International Knee Documentation Committee scores (P = .808 and P = .152, respectively) and Orthopadische Arbeitsgruppe Knie score (P = .702) at the last follow-up. No significant differences in mechanical stability were observed with the KT-1000 arthrometer and stress radiographs between the groups (P = .650 and P = .791, respectively). The remnant tensioning group took a longer surgical time than the preservation-only group (156.4 minutes v 134.5 minutes, P = .117).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The ACL remnant tensioning procedure did not improve the final results of an ACL reconstruction in terms of the clinical function and stability compared with an ACL reconstruction using the preservation-only technique.
  
  
  METHODS
  Level III, retrospective comparative study.
authors.affiliation: Hyundae General Hospital, Namyangju-Si, Gyeonggi-Do, South Korea.
authors.forename: Young-Bok
authors.initials: YB
authors.lastname: Jung
authors.forename: Ho-Joong
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: Jung
authors.forename: Hawa-Tahir
authors.initials: HT
authors.lastname: Siti
authors.forename: Yong Seuk
authors.initials: YS
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Han-Jun
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Sang Hak
authors.initials: SH
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.forename: Hye-Young
authors.initials: HY
authors.lastname: Cheon
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D016118:Anterior Cruciate Ligament / Q000473:pathology / Q000601:surgery; D000070598:Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; D059549:Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction / Q000379:methods*; D053587:Arthrometry, Articular; D001182:Arthroscopy / Q000379:methods*; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D001858:Bone Nails; D001863:Bone Screws; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D007593:Joint Instability / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control; D008297:Male; D008592:Menisci, Tibial / Q000601:surgery; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular; D020127:Recovery of Function; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D000070600:Tibial Meniscus Injuries; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D055815:Young Adult