Mohammad Mehdi Sarzaeem, MD; Mohammad Razi, MD; Farideh Najafi, MD; Mohammad Amin Najafi
Abstract
Background: The gold standard in ACL reconstructions has been the bone–patellar tendon–bone autograftfixed with interference screws. This prospective study, aimed to compare two method of fixation for BPTB grafts: press fit fixation vs. interference screw, over a 12 months follow-up interval.Methods: ...
Read More
Background: The gold standard in ACL reconstructions has been the bone–patellar tendon–bone autograftfixed with interference screws. This prospective study, aimed to compare two method of fixation for BPTB grafts: press fit fixation vs. interference screw, over a 12 months follow-up interval.Methods: In a randomized clinical trial study, 158 patients with an average age of 29.8 years were treated for torn ACL with BPTB autograft in a teaching hospital in Tehran, Iran. In 82 patients press fit fixation technique, and in 76 cases an interference-screw was used. At the time of final follow-up, 71 patients in press-fit group and 65 patients in interference-screw group were evaluated in terms of return to pre-injury activity level, pain, knee stability, range of motion, IKDC score and complications.Results: In the final follow-up, 59 cases in interference screw and 55 in press-fit screw group had good-to-excellent IKDC score (p < /em>≥.05). The mean laxity assessed improved to 2.7 mm and 2.5 mm in press-fit and screw group, respectively. Regarding Lachman and pivot shift tests, there was a statistically significant improvement in the integrity of the ACL in both groups, with no significant difference (p < /em>≥.05).Conclusions: the press-fit technique is an efficient procedure. Its outcome was comparable with the interference screw group. Furthermore it has unlimited bone-to-bone healing, no need for removal of hardware, ease for revision and cost effectiveness.
