Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: how do we perform it? Brazilian orthopedic surgeons' preference
Purpose We evaluated current trends and common practice of Brazilian orthopedic surgeons while selecting approaches for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery. Methods Orthopedic surgeons (n = 191) completed a survey consisting of seven questions regarding their profiles and prefere...
| Autores: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2016 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) |
| Repositorio: | Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.unifesp.br:11600/57921 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2905-5 https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/57921 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Anterior cruciate ligament Surgeons Orthopedic surgeons Surgical approach |
| Sumario: | Purpose We evaluated current trends and common practice of Brazilian orthopedic surgeons while selecting approaches for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery. Methods Orthopedic surgeons (n = 191) completed a survey consisting of seven questions regarding their profiles and preference for ACL reconstruction techniques. Results Most surgeons were from Southeast Brazil (56.6 %) and had specialized in knee surgery (79.5 %); most participants (55.1 %) had worked in this field for > five years, and 46.8 % had performed >50 ACL reconstructions. Further, 93.1 % respondents preferred the hamstring graft. Analysis of preference for the femoral tunnel approach in terms of years of experience showed that surgeons with ten to 15 years' experience preferred the transtibial approach; those with < five years of experience, the transportal technique; those with >15 years' experience, the two-incision technique. Conclusions Surgeons' preferences for ACL reconstruction are variable, and are influenced by learning time and availability of tools rather than research evidence. |
|---|