Clinical Trials Logo

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Not yet recruiting

Administrative data

NCT number NCT05532189
Other study ID # AAAU0966
Secondary ID
Status Not yet recruiting
Phase N/A
First received
Last updated
Start date December 2023
Est. completion date September 2032

Study information

Verified date August 2023
Source Columbia University
Contact Christian A Pearsall, BS, BA
Phone 251-377-6058
Email cap2263@cumc.columbia.edu
Is FDA regulated No
Health authority
Study type Interventional

Clinical Trial Summary

There is no consensus regarding the best surgical management of primary ACL tears. Recent evidence suggests that internal brace augmentation may increase load failure and therefore stabilize the graft in-situ at the time of ACL reconstruction. This prospective randomized controlled trial aims to compare the time to return to activity, and participant reported outcomes in participants with bone-tendon-bone ACL reconstruction with and without (control) internal brace augmentation.


Description:

Despite the wide variety of surgical approaches and grafts that can be used in an ACL reconstruction, graft failure and recurrent knee instability are nevertheless ubiquitous issues that have facilitated interest in ways to strengthen the graft at the time of surgery. While both animal and biomechanical models have strongly suggested improved graft strength and patient outcomes by utilizing suture tape augmentation in ACL reconstructions, there is scant clinical literature available to assess these extrapolations. A retrospective cohort study of 60 patients undergoing ACL reconstruction with a hamstring autograft or allograft (30 suture tape vs 30 no suture tape; mean age: 30), found shorter time to return to activity (9.2 months suture tape group vs 12.9 months no suture tape group; p=0.002), lower Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Indices (WOMAC) (2.2 suture tape group vs 6.2 no suture tape group; p=0.024), higher international knee documentation committee (IKDC) scores (87.6 suture tape group vs 73.2 no suture tape group; p=0.006), lower average pain on the national pain rating scale (NPRS) (0.6 suture tape group vs 1.66 no suture tape group; p=0.021) and no significant difference in range of motion in degrees (129 suture tape group vs 127 no suture tape group; p=0.46), knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) (92.2 suture tape group vs 87.1 no suture tape group; p=0.68), or complications (13% suture tape vs 10% no suture tape; p>0.05) at 2 years follow up. A retrospective cohort study of 108 patients undergoing ACL reconstruction with a hamstring autograft with and without suture tape reinforcement (36 suture tape vs 72 no suture tape; mean age: 25), found a significantly higher Tegner activity score (7.1 suture tape group vs 6.4 no suture tape group; p=0.026) but otherwise no significant difference in time to preinjury activity level (11.9 mos suture tape group vs 11.6 no suture tape group; p=0.59), range of motion (degrees) (136 suture tape group vs 137 no suture tape group; p=0.44) , Lysholm knee score (95.6 suture tape group vs 94 no suture tape group; p=0.165), IKDC score (94.4 suture tape group vs 93.8 no suture tape group; p=0.44), or complications (6% suture tape group vs 5% no suture tape group; p>0.05) at 2 years follow up. A prospective cohort study of 50 ACL reconstructions with hamstring autograft with and without suture tape reinforcement (25 suture tape group vs 25 no suture tape group; mean age: 30), found a significant improvement in greater than 2 grades of Lachman testing from preoperative assessment compared to 6 months follow-up (68% suture tape group vs 32% no suture tape group; p=0.039) but no difference in Lysholm knee score at 6 months (87.0 suture tape group vs 87.0 no suture tape group; p=0.756). Moreover, none of the already-limited clinical data investigates the use of internal braces with bone-tendon-bone grafts, which are a popular choice for young adults and athletes. Furthermore, there are no current level 1 data on this subject. Therefore, this study aims to compare the time to return to pre- injury activity level, incidence of recurrent knee instability, and patient reported outcomes of patients treated with ACL reconstruction using bone-tendon-bone autograft with and without (control group) internal brace stabilization.


Recruitment information / eligibility

Status Not yet recruiting
Enrollment 200
Est. completion date September 2032
Est. primary completion date September 2032
Accepts healthy volunteers Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Gender All
Age group 12 Years and older
Eligibility Inclusion Criteria: - patients 12 and older - patients seen by the Columbia University Sports Medicine Service - patients diagnosed with a first time ACL injury by clinical exam and MRI Exclusion Criteria: - previous knee surgery - concurrent knee fracture or ligamentous injury on ipsilateral knee - neuromuscular disorder involving lower limb - inability/ unwillingness to adhere to protocol - anesthesia contraindications - lost to follow up

Study Design


Related Conditions & MeSH terms

  • ACL Tear
  • Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries

Intervention

Procedure:
ACL reconstruction with BTB autograft with internal brace augmentation (suture tape)
The ACL will be reconstructed using a participant's own patella tendon (BTB autograft), and the graft will be fortified by suture tape during the surgery in order to strengthen it.
ACL reconstruction with BTB autograft without internal brace augmentation (suture tape)
The ACL will be reconstructed using a participant's own patella tendon (BTB autograft). The graft will not be fortified by suture tape in this group. It will be used as is without any modification.
Other:
Standardized Rehabilitation Protocol
Participants will undergo a standardized rehabilitation protocol with twice weekly physical therapy

Locations

Country Name City State
United States Columbia University Irving Medical Center New York New York

Sponsors (1)

Lead Sponsor Collaborator
Columbia University

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

References & Publications (10)

Batty LM, Norsworthy CJ, Lash NJ, Wasiak J, Richmond AK, Feller JA. Synthetic devices for reconstructive surgery of the cruciate ligaments: a systematic review. Arthroscopy. 2015 May;31(5):957-68. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2014.11.032. Epub 2015 Jan 22. — View Citation

Bodendorfer BM, Michaelson EM, Shu HT, Apseloff NA, Spratt JD, Nolton EC, Argintar EH. Suture Augmented Versus Standard Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Matched Comparative Analysis. Arthroscopy. 2019 Jul;35(7):2114-2122. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.01.054. Epub 2019 Jun 2. — View Citation

Bowman EN, Limpisvasti O, Cole BJ, ElAttrache NS. Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Graft Preference Most Dependent on Patient Age: A Survey of United States Surgeons. Arthroscopy. 2021 May;37(5):1559-1566. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.01.042. Epub 2021 Feb 1. — View Citation

Cohen SB, Yucha DT, Ciccotti MC, Goldstein DT, Ciccotti MA, Ciccotti MG. Factors affecting patient selection of graft type in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2009 Sep;25(9):1006-10. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2009.02.010. — View Citation

E A Mackenzie C, Huntington LS, Tulloch S. Suture Tape Augmentation of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Increases Biomechanical Stability: A Scoping Review of Biomechanical, Animal, and Clinical Studies. Arthroscopy. 2022 Jun;38(6):2073-2089. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.12.036. Epub 2022 Jan 3. — View Citation

Engebretsen L, Benum P, Fasting O, Molster A, Strand T. A prospective, randomized study of three surgical techniques for treatment of acute ruptures of the anterior cruciate ligament. Am J Sports Med. 1990 Nov-Dec;18(6):585-90. doi: 10.1177/036354659001800605. — View Citation

Mall NA, Chalmers PN, Moric M, Tanaka MJ, Cole BJ, Bach BR Jr, Paletta GA Jr. Incidence and trends of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the United States. Am J Sports Med. 2014 Oct;42(10):2363-70. doi: 10.1177/0363546514542796. Epub 2014 Aug 1. — View Citation

Parkes CW, Leland DP, Levy BA, Stuart MJ, Camp CL, Saris DBF, Krych AJ. Hamstring Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using an All-Inside Technique With and Without Independent Suture Tape Reinforcement. Arthroscopy. 2021 Feb;37(2):609-616. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.09.002. Epub 2020 Nov 2. — View Citation

Smith PA, Bley JA. Allograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Utilizing Internal Brace Augmentation. Arthrosc Tech. 2016 Oct 10;5(5):e1143-e1147. doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2016.06.007. eCollection 2016 Oct. — View Citation

Spindler KP, Wright RW. Clinical practice. Anterior cruciate ligament tear. N Engl J Med. 2008 Nov 13;359(20):2135-42. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp0804745. No abstract available. — View Citation

Outcome

Type Measure Description Time frame Safety issue
Primary Time to Return to Full Activity or Sports Time from treatment initiation to full return to pre-injury activity levels in each group, expressed in weeks Measured once per participant, depending on the time required to return to full activity (up to 10 years)
Primary Percentage of Participants with Recurrent Knee Instability Percentage of participants that experience recurrent instability after treatment starts at each time point 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years and 10 years
Primary Change in Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function (PF) Computer Adaptive Test (CAT) at 2 weeks A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's physical functional capacity has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 2 weeks
Primary Change in PROMIS PF CAT at 6 weeks A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's physical functional capacity has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 6 weeks
Primary Change in PROMIS PF CAT at 3 months A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's physical functional capacity has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 3 months
Primary Change in PROMIS PF CAT at 6 months A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's physical functional capacity has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 6 months
Primary Change in PROMIS PF CAT at 1 year A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's physical functional capacity has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 1 year
Primary Change in PROMIS PF CAT at 2 years A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's physical functional capacity has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 2 years
Primary Change in PROMIS PF CAT at 5 years A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's physical functional capacity has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 5 years
Primary Change in PROMIS PF CAT at 10 years A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's physical functional capacity has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 10 years
Primary Change in PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) CAT at 2 weeks A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's pain has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 2 weeks
Primary Change in PROMIS PI CAT at 6 weeks A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's pain has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 6 weeks
Primary Change in PROMIS PI CAT at 3 months A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's pain has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 3 months
Primary Change in PROMIS PI CAT at 6 months A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's pain has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 6 months
Primary Change in PROMIS PI CAT at 1 year A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's pain has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 1 year
Primary Change in PROMIS PI CAT at 2 years A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's pain has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 2 years
Primary Change in PROMIS PI CAT at 5 years A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's pain has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 5 years
Primary Change in PROMIS PI CAT at 10 years A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's pain has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 10 years
Primary Change in PROMIS Depression CAT at 2 weeks A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's quality of life has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 2 weeks
Primary Change in PROMIS Depression CAT at 6 weeks A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's quality of life has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 6 weeks
Primary Change in PROMIS Depression CAT at 3 months A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's quality of life has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 3 months
Primary Change in PROMIS Depression CAT at 6 months A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's quality of life has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 6 months
Primary Change in PROMIS Depression CAT at 1 year A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's quality of life has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 1 year
Primary Change in PROMIS Depression CAT at 2 years A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's quality of life has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 2 years
Primary Change in PROMIS Depression CAT at 5 years A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's quality of life has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 5 years
Primary Change in PROMIS Depression CAT at 10 years A computerized questionnaire ranging from 0 to 100 points that addresses how a participant's quality of life has been impacted by their knee injury. A lower score indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 10 years
Secondary Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) Score at 2 weeks The WOMAC questionnaire has subscores for pain (0-20), stiffness (0-8), and physical function (0-68), which address the impact of an injury on a participant's life. A lower total score (sum of subscores) indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 2 weeks
Secondary Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) Score at 6 weeks The WOMAC questionnaire has subscores for pain (0-20), stiffness (0-8), and physical function (0-68), which address the impact of an injury on a participant's life. A lower total score (sum of subscores) indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 6 weeks
Secondary Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) Score at 3 months The WOMAC questionnaire has subscores for pain (0-20), stiffness (0-8), and physical function (0-68), which address the impact of an injury on a participant's life. A lower total score (sum of subscores) indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 3 months
Secondary Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) Score at 6 months The WOMAC questionnaire has subscores for pain (0-20), stiffness (0-8), and physical function (0-68), which address the impact of an injury on a participant's life. A lower total score (sum of subscores) indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 6 months
Secondary Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) Score at 1 year The WOMAC questionnaire has subscores for pain (0-20), stiffness (0-8), and physical function (0-68), which address the impact of an injury on a participant's life. A lower total score (sum of subscores) indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 1 year
Secondary Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) Score at 2 years The WOMAC questionnaire has subscores for pain (0-20), stiffness (0-8), and physical function (0-68), which address the impact of an injury on a participant's life. A lower total score (sum of subscores) indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 2 years
Secondary Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) Score at 5 years The WOMAC questionnaire has subscores for pain (0-20), stiffness (0-8), and physical function (0-68), which address the impact of an injury on a participant's life. A lower total score (sum of subscores) indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 5 years
Secondary Change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) Score at 10 years The WOMAC questionnaire has subscores for pain (0-20), stiffness (0-8), and physical function (0-68), which address the impact of an injury on a participant's life. A lower total score (sum of subscores) indicates a better outcome. Baseline and 10 years
Secondary Change in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score at 2 weeks The IKDC questionnaire is scored from 0 (worse outcome)-100 (better outcome) and addresses knee symptoms, function, and physical activity. Baseline and 2 weeks
Secondary Change in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score at 6 weeks The IKDC questionnaire is scored from 0 (worse outcome)-100 (better outcome) and addresses knee symptoms, function, and physical activity. Baseline and 6 weeks
Secondary Change in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score at 3 months The IKDC questionnaire is scored from 0 (worse outcome)-100 (better outcome) and addresses knee symptoms, function, and physical activity. Baseline and 3 months
Secondary Change in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score at 6 months The IKDC questionnaire is scored from 0 (worse outcome)-100 (better outcome) and addresses knee symptoms, function, and physical activity. Baseline and 6 months
Secondary Change in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score at 1 year The IKDC questionnaire is scored from 0 (worse outcome)-100 (better outcome) and addresses knee symptoms, function, and physical activity. Baseline and 1 year
Secondary Change in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score at 2 years The IKDC questionnaire is scored from 0 (worse outcome)-100 (better outcome) and addresses knee symptoms, function, and physical activity. Baseline and 2 years
Secondary Change in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score at 5 years The IKDC questionnaire is scored from 0 (worse outcome)-100 (better outcome) and addresses knee symptoms, function, and physical activity. Baseline and 5 years
Secondary Change in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score at 10 years The IKDC questionnaire is scored from 0 (worse outcome)-100 (better outcome) and addresses knee symptoms, function, and physical activity. Baseline and 10 years
Secondary Change in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) Score at 2 weeks The NPRS is a questionnaire on a visual analog scale of 0 to 10 that a participant rates based on how bad their pain is (0 = no pain; 10 = maximum pain) Baseline and 2 weeks
Secondary Change in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) Score at 6 weeks The NPRS is a questionnaire on a visual analog scale of 0 to 10 that a participant rates based on how bad their pain is (0 = no pain; 10 = maximum pain) Baseline and 6 weeks
Secondary Change in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) Score at 3 months The NPRS is a questionnaire on a visual analog scale of 0 to 10 that a participant rates based on how bad their pain is (0 = no pain; 10 = maximum pain) Baseline and 3 months
Secondary Change in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) Score at 6 months The NPRS is a questionnaire on a visual analog scale of 0 to 10 that a participant rates based on how bad their pain is (0 = no pain; 10 = maximum pain) Baseline and 6 months
Secondary Change in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) Score at 1 year The NPRS is a questionnaire on a visual analog scale of 0 to 10 that a participant rates based on how bad their pain is (0 = no pain; 10 = maximum pain) Baseline and 1 year
Secondary Change in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) Score at 2 years The NPRS is a questionnaire on a visual analog scale of 0 to 10 that a participant rates based on how bad their pain is (0 = no pain; 10 = maximum pain) Baseline and 2 years
Secondary Change in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) Score at 5 years The NPRS is a questionnaire on a visual analog scale of 0 to 10 that a participant rates based on how bad their pain is (0 = no pain; 10 = maximum pain) Baseline and 5 years
Secondary Change in numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) Score at 10 years The NPRS is a questionnaire on a visual analog scale of 0 to 10 that a participant rates based on how bad their pain is (0 = no pain; 10 = maximum pain) Baseline and 10 years
Secondary Change in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 2 weeks The KOOS score is a questionnaire regarding the severity of participants' knee symptoms, which is scored from 0 to 100 (100 representing no severity; 0 representing maximum severity ) Baseline and 2 weeks
Secondary Change in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 6 weeks The KOOS score is a questionnaire regarding the severity of participants' knee symptoms, which is scored from 0 to 100 (100 representing no severity; 0 representing maximum severity ) Baseline and 6 weeks
Secondary Change in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 3 months The KOOS score is a questionnaire regarding the severity of participants' knee symptoms, which is scored from 0 to 100 (100 representing no severity; 0 representing maximum severity ) Baseline and 3 months
Secondary Change in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 6 months The KOOS score is a questionnaire regarding the severity of participants' knee symptoms, which is scored from 0 to 100 (100 representing no severity; 0 representing maximum severity ) Baseline and 6 months
Secondary Change in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 1 year The KOOS score is a questionnaire regarding the severity of participants' knee symptoms, which is scored from 0 to 100 (100 representing no severity; 0 representing maximum severity ) Baseline and 1 year
Secondary Change in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 2 years The KOOS score is a questionnaire regarding the severity of participants' knee symptoms, which is scored from 0 to 100 (100 representing no severity; 0 representing maximum severity ) Baseline and 2 years
Secondary Change in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 5 years The KOOS score is a questionnaire regarding the severity of participants' knee symptoms, which is scored from 0 to 100 (100 representing no severity; 0 representing maximum severity ) Baseline and 5 years
Secondary Change in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 10 years The KOOS score is a questionnaire regarding the severity of participants' knee symptoms, which is scored from 0 to 100 (100 representing no severity; 0 representing maximum severity ) Baseline and 10 years
Secondary Change in Tegner activity scale (TAS) Score at 2 weeks TAS is a one-item questionnaire assessing the activity level of patients on a scale of 0-10, with 0 representing disability and 10 representing the level of a professional athlete. Baseline and 2 weeks
Secondary Change in Tegner activity scale (TAS) Score at 6 weeks TAS is a one-item questionnaire assessing the activity level of patients on a scale of 0-10, with 0 representing disability and 10 representing the level of a professional athlete. Baseline and 6 weeks
Secondary Change in Tegner activity scale (TAS) Score at 3 months TAS is a one-item questionnaire assessing the activity level of patients on a scale of 0-10, with 0 representing disability and 10 representing the level of a professional athlete. Baseline and 3 months
Secondary Change in Tegner activity scale (TAS) Score at 6 months TAS is a one-item questionnaire assessing the activity level of patients on a scale of 0-10, with 0 representing disability and 10 representing the level of a professional athlete. Baseline and 6 months
Secondary Change in Tegner activity scale (TAS) Score at 1 year TAS is a one-item questionnaire assessing the activity level of patients on a scale of 0-10, with 0 representing disability and 10 representing the level of a professional athlete. Baseline and 1 year
Secondary Change in Tegner activity scale (TAS) Score at 2 years TAS is a one-item questionnaire assessing the activity level of patients on a scale of 0-10, with 0 representing disability and 10 representing the level of a professional athlete. Baseline and 2 years
Secondary Change in Tegner activity scale (TAS) Score at 5 years TAS is a one-item questionnaire assessing the activity level of patients on a scale of 0-10, with 0 representing disability and 10 representing the level of a professional athlete. Baseline and 5 years
Secondary Change in Tegner activity scale (TAS) Score at 10 years TAS is a one-item questionnaire assessing the activity level of patients on a scale of 0-10, with 0 representing disability and 10 representing the level of a professional athlete. Baseline and 10 years
Secondary Change in Lysholm Score at 2 weeks Lysholm score is a questionnaire out of 100 points that addresses specific aspects of participant's knee symptoms, with 100 indicating little to no symptoms and 0 indicating severe symptoms. Baseline and 2 weeks
Secondary Change in Lysholm Score at 6 weeks Lysholm score is a questionnaire out of 100 points that addresses specific aspects of participant's knee symptoms, with 100 indicating little to no symptoms and 0 indicating severe symptoms. Baseline and 6 weeks
Secondary Change in Lysholm Score at 3 months Lysholm score is a questionnaire out of 100 points that addresses specific aspects of participant's knee symptoms, with 100 indicating little to no symptoms and 0 indicating severe symptoms. Baseline and 3 months
Secondary Change in Lysholm Score at 6 months Lysholm score is a questionnaire out of 100 points that addresses specific aspects of participant's knee symptoms, with 100 indicating little to no symptoms and 0 indicating severe symptoms. Baseline and 6 months
Secondary Change in Lysholm Score at 1 year Lysholm score is a questionnaire out of 100 points that addresses specific aspects of participant's knee symptoms, with 100 indicating little to no symptoms and 0 indicating severe symptoms. Baseline and 1 year
Secondary Change in Lysholm Score at 2 years Lysholm score is a questionnaire out of 100 points that addresses specific aspects of participant's knee symptoms, with 100 indicating little to no symptoms and 0 indicating severe symptoms. Baseline and 2 years
Secondary Change in Lysholm Score at 5 years Lysholm score is a questionnaire out of 100 points that addresses specific aspects of participant's knee symptoms, with 100 indicating little to no symptoms and 0 indicating severe symptoms. Baseline and 5 years
Secondary Change in Lysholm Score at 10 years Lysholm score is a questionnaire out of 100 points that addresses specific aspects of participant's knee symptoms, with 100 indicating little to no symptoms and 0 indicating severe symptoms. Baseline and 10 years
See also
  Status Clinical Trial Phase
Completed NCT02450292 - Retrospective CT Imaging of BioComposite Interference Screw With BTB
Recruiting NCT05912777 - 3D Reconstruction of the Knee Based on MRI N/A
Recruiting NCT04058574 - Proprioceptive Isokinetic Repositioning, Functional Testing, and a Self-reported Questionnaire Before and After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction N/A
Recruiting NCT06274008 - Exparel vs. ACB With Bupivacaine for ACL Reconstruction Phase 1
Recruiting NCT06096259 - Preventing Injured Knees From osteoArthritis: Severity Outcomes Phase 2
Active, not recruiting NCT05338385 - Readiness Outcomes Affecting Return to Sport 2.0: An Intervention Feasibility & Pilot Study N/A
Enrolling by invitation NCT05931627 - Tourniquet Use in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT06340932 - Impact of Opioid Avoidance Protocol for ACL Reconstruction
Completed NCT04484961 - Effects of Blood Flow Restriction Rehabilitation After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction N/A
Completed NCT05876013 - Reduced Knee Flexion Strength 18 Years After ACL Reconstruction in Hamstring Group Compared to Patellar Tendon Group
Recruiting NCT04748328 - Comparison Effectiveness Analysis Between ACL Reconstruction and Rehabilitation in Peripheral and Main Capital in Indonesia
Recruiting NCT04732585 - Kinematic Assessment of Human Peripheral Joints by Dynamic CT N/A
Completed NCT03243162 - Improving ACL Reconstruction Outcomes: CBPT N/A
Recruiting NCT06235736 - Do Patients With ACL Tears Demonstrate Weakness of the Soleus Muscle?
Not yet recruiting NCT06063915 - Isoinertial Rehabilitation in Recovering Hamstring Strength Following Surgical Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction N/A
Recruiting NCT04550299 - ACL Reconstruction With Simple and Double Bundle Technique Using Two Different Implants for Graft Fixation N/A
Not yet recruiting NCT04721119 - Comparing Adductor Canal Block and Adductor Canal Block-Local Infiltration Analgesia for Post-operative Pain Management N/A
Completed NCT04827264 - Safe Return to Play After ACL Reconstruction
Recruiting NCT04682392 - ACL Bone Health and Loading Study N/A
Recruiting NCT05241795 - Knee vs. Ankle Training on Knee Mechanics After ACLR N/A