Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorPersson, Andreas
dc.contributor.authorGifstad, Tone
dc.contributor.authorLind, Martin
dc.contributor.authorEngebretsen, Lars
dc.contributor.authorFjeldsgaard, Knut
dc.contributor.authorDrogset, Jon Olav
dc.contributor.authorForssblad, Magnus
dc.contributor.authorEspehaug, Birgitte
dc.contributor.authorKjellsen, Asle
dc.contributor.authorFevang, Jonas Meling
dc.coverage.spatialScandinavianb_NO
dc.date.accessioned2019-06-19T06:59:12Z
dc.date.available2019-06-19T06:59:12Z
dc.date.created2018-01-09T14:51:09Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationPersson, A., Gifstad, T., Lind, M., Engebretsen, L., Fjeldsgaard, K., Drogset, J. O., . . . Fevang, J. M. (2017). Graft fixation influences revision risk after ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autografts. Acta Orthopaedica, 89(2), 204-210.nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn1745-3674
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2601265
dc.description.abstractBackground and purpose — A large number of fixation methods of hamstring tendon autograft (HT) are available for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Some studies report an association between fixation method and the risk of revision ACLR. We compared the risk of revision of various femoral and tibial fixation methods used for HT in Scandinavia 2004–2011. Materials and methods — A register-based study of 38,666 patients undergoing primary ACLRs with HT, with 1,042 revision ACLRs. The overall median follow-up time was 2.8 (0–8) years. Fixation devices used in a small number of patients were grouped according to design and the point of fixation. Results — The most common fixation methods were Endobutton (36%) and Rigidfix (31%) in the femur; and interference screw (48%) and Intrafix (34%) in the tibia. In a multivariable Cox regression model, the transfemoral fixations Rigidfix and Transfix had a lower risk of revision (HR 0.7 [95% CI 0.6–0.8] and 0.7 [CI 0.6–0.9] respectively) compared with Endobutton. In the tibia the retro interference screw had a higher risk of revision (HR 1.9 [CI 1.3–2.9]) compared with an interference screw. Interpretation — The choice of graft fixation influences the risk of revision after primary ACLR with hamstring tendon autograft.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherTaylor & Francisnb_NO
dc.rightsNavngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleGraft fixation influences revision risk after ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autografts : A study of 38,666 patients from the Scandinavian knee ligament registries 2004–2011nb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.rights.holder© 2017 The Author(s)nb_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Klinisk medisinske fag: 750nb_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Klinisk medisinske fag: 750::Ortopedisk kirurgi: 784nb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber7nb_NO
dc.source.journalActa Orthopaedicanb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/17453674.2017.1406243
dc.identifier.cristin1539006
cristin.unitcode203,3,20,0
cristin.unitnameSenter for kunnskapsbasert praksis - Bergen
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse-Ikkekommersiell 4.0 Internasjonal