| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4077364 | The Knee | 2015 | 4 Pages |
•Long term follow-up of at least 10 years of single ACL ruptures treated with the LARS™ system•The LARS™ system presented with a high failure rate at long term outcome•50% re-rupture rate•Seven patients (63%) showed radiological signs of osteoarthritis•The LARS™ system should not be suggested as potential primary ACL-reconstruction method
BackgroundSince the 1980's several artificial ligaments were used for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) serving different complications. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and functional outcomes of primary ACL reconstruction using the Ligament Augmentation Reconstruction System (LARS™) with a minimum follow-up of 10-years. The LARS™ presents a synthetic material consisting of non-absorbing polyethylene terephthalate fibres used for ligament reconstruction.MethodsOutcomes of 18 patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using the LARS™ system between 2000 and 2004 with a minimum follow-up of 10 years were observed. The International Knee Documentation Committee score (IKDC), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Lysholm score, and Tegner Activity Scale were assessed. Clinical assessment was performed by Lachman testing, assessment of side-to-side difference on KT-2000 testing and plain radiography evaluation of osteoarthritis.ResultsThere were seven males and 11 females, mean age 29 years (range, 18 to 44 years) and a mean follow-up of 151.5 months. Five patients (27.8%) sustained a re-rupture of the LARS™ system and underwent revision surgery after a mean time of 23 months and four patients (22.2%) presented with a re-rupture. The average IKDC score was 76.60 ± 18.18, the average Lysholm score was 88.00 ± 10.07 and the average Tegner activity score was five at final follow-up.ConclusionOur results indicate that the LARS™ system should currently not be suggested as a potential graft for primary reconstruction of the ACL. In special cases, however, the LARS™ system can serve as an alternative graft.Level of evidence: Level IV, retrospective study.
