1996
DOI: 10.1097/00003086-199603000-00016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Allograft Versus Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

9
168
0
8

Year Published

2001
2001
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 254 publications
(185 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
9
168
0
8
Order By: Relevance
“…As several studies (Harner et al, 1996;Shelton et al, 1997;Peterson et al, 2001;Rihn et al, 2006) reported, we found that individuals who had an autograft reconstruction had more significant numbness and dysesthesia in the area of the incision than individuals who underwent allograft reconstruction, but there was no difference in patient-reported kneeling problems.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 50%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As several studies (Harner et al, 1996;Shelton et al, 1997;Peterson et al, 2001;Rihn et al, 2006) reported, we found that individuals who had an autograft reconstruction had more significant numbness and dysesthesia in the area of the incision than individuals who underwent allograft reconstruction, but there was no difference in patient-reported kneeling problems.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 50%
“…Many studies reported that the ACL reconstruction with BPTB autograft produced good clinical results (Harner et al, 1996;Fu et al, 2000;Deehan et al, 2000;Gorschewsky et al, 2007;Han et al, 2008). However, a desire to avoid the sacrifice of autologous tissue and to minimize surgical trauma and postoperative donor site morbidity has promoted the consideration of alternative graft sources (Stringham et al, 1996;Siebold et al, 2003;Barrett et al, 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Allografts eliminate harvest morbidity and reportedly allow faster rehabilitation, earlier return to full activity, and possible cost reduction [4,10,25]. Disadvantages of using allografts, however, include potential disease transmission and prolonged graft healing [7,11,22,26,31,33].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Greft seçimi, cerrahi deneyim, tercih, doku durumu, hastanın yaşı, aktivite durumu, eş-lik eden hastalıklar, cerrahi öncesi durum ve hastanın kararına bağlıdır. [2][3][4]15,16] ÖÇB rekonstrüksiyonunda altın standart olarak kabul edilen KPTK otogreftler; kemik tünellerde kemikkemiğe kaynama nedeniyle adaptasyon süresini kısalt-ması ve rijit tespitlerle kullanılabilmesi gibi avantajlarının yanında birçok dezavantajı vardır. Bunlar, kuadriseps kas gücü zafiyeti, ekstansiyon kaybı, diz önü ağrısı gibi birçok istenmeyen komplikasyonlardır.…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Bununla birlikte rekonstrüksiyonun nasıl ve ne ile yapı-lacağı konusu halen tartışmalıdır. [3][4][5][6][7][8] ÖÇB rekonstrüksiyonunda altın standart olarak gö-rülen kemik-patellar tendon-kemik (KPTK) otogrefti kullanılmasını takiben diz önü ağrısı gibi istenmeyen sorunlar oluşabileceği gösterilmiştir. Dörtlü hamstring (semitendinözis-grasilis) tendon (DHT) otogrefti ile tedavide patellofemoral ağrı ve ekstansiyon kaybı-nın daha az olduğu bildirilmiştir.…”
unclassified