Comparison of augmented and non-augmented anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction combined with high tibial osteotomy.

In a follow-up study 27 patients were evaluated after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL-)reconstruction combined with high tibial osteotomy because of chronic rupture of the ACL, cartilaginous lesions of the medial compartment and varus malalignment. They were divided into two groups. In 14 patients (non-LAD group) ACL reconstruction was performed using the central third of the autologous patellar tendon modified according to Eriksson-Trillat. Thirteen patients (LAD group) underwent repair with the same technique, but a Kennedy ligament augmentation device (LAD) in "hot dog' technique and fixed over the top was added. The postoperative treatment was the same in both groups. All patients were examined according to IKDC criteria. KT-1000 arthrometer testing at maximum manual traction was performed. Although the mean follow-up interval was more than double in the non-LAD group (non-LAD: 127 months vs LAD: 58 months), the subjective and clinical results, IKDC evaluation and KT-1000 arthrometer testing results were similar, showing no statistically significant difference. Further, no complications due to the use of LAD occurred. In this study no evident functional or clinical advantage from the augmentation performed could be shown.