Injerto autólogo de isquiotibiales versus cuádriceps en la plastía de ligamento cruzado anterior. Estudio comparativo con enfoque al Return-To-Sport

  • García-Linage R
  • Lassard-Rosenthal J
  • Noval-García R
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Introduction: anterior cruciate ligament rupture has evolved to be one of the most common sports injuries with a remarkable increase in its incidence in the last two decades, with Return-To-Sport being a crucial approach in the choice of autologous graft for its surgical repair, the most commonly used being hamstring and quadriceps tendon graft. Material and methods: a prospective randomized study was performed with 32 patients divided into two groups, one for each type of graft, with 13 patients in each. They were evaluated before surgery, at 30, 180 and 360 days after the procedure using scales such as Lysholm, mCKRS and ACL-RSI, and their previous activity level was considered using the Tegner score. Results: it was observed that, at 30 and 180 days after surgery, there were significant differences in pain assessment using the VAS scale between the groups, while at 360 days no significant differences were observed. No significant differences were found in Lysholm and mCKRS scale scores in either group at days 30, 180, and 360, but significant differences were found in ACL-RSI scale scores at 30 and 180 days between the two groups, which did not hold at 360 days. Conclusion: despite the difference in postoperative pain, Return-To-Sport times and overall recovery showed no significant differences between the two types of grafts in this study.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

García-Linage, R., Lassard-Rosenthal, J., Noval-García, R., Muñiz-Madrazo, A., Fraind-Maya, G., Palmero-Picazo, J., … Zimbrón-López, D. (2025). Injerto autólogo de isquiotibiales versus cuádriceps en la plastía de ligamento cruzado anterior. Estudio comparativo con enfoque al Return-To-Sport. Acta Ortopédica Mexicana, 39(1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.35366/118848

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free