Journal Article
Systematic Review
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Knee Osteoarthritis After Single-Bundle Versus Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Arthroscopy 2019 March
PURPOSE: To systematically review high-quality studies in the literature to compare the postoperative radiographic incidence of knee osteoarthritis (OA) after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with a single-bundle (SB) versus double-bundle (DB) graft.

METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to locate randomized controlled trials that compared the postoperative progression of knee OA in SB versus DB ACLR patients. The search terms used were "anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction," "single-bundle," "double-bundle," "randomized," and "osteoarthritis." Patients were assessed based on radiographic evaluation (Kellgren-Lawrence [K-L] and objective International Knee Documentation Committee scales) and graft failure.

RESULTS: A total of 7 studies (5 Level I and 2 Level II) met the inclusion criteria, including 375 SB and 477 DB ACLR patients with a mean follow-up period of 5.3 years. Graft failure occurred in 3.2% of patients overall (27 of 852), with no significant difference between groups (P = .10). No significant difference in overall K-L grade distribution was found between groups (P = .90). Overall, 15.1% of patients (58 of 383) were given a K-L grade of 2 or greater, including 14.4% in the SB group (31 of 215) and 16.1% in the DB group (27 of 168) (P = .65). Using other, unconventional grading schemes, 2 studies found DB ACLR patients to have significantly fewer signs of radiographic knee OA at follow-up compared with SB ACLR patients (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing ACLR with either an SB or DB graft can be expected to experience a similar incidence of postoperative knee OA at midterm follow-up according to the K-L grading system.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review of Level I and II studies.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app