lars ligament what’s the fuss all about?
DESCRIPTION
LARS Ligament What’s the fuss all about?. Media Love LARS. “Miracle op to melt down surgeons' phones” “Is LARS revolution about to start?” . Players, Coaches and Clubs Love LARS. “Rodan's LARS recovery stuns coaches” “Rodan back two weeks after knee surgery”. Club Doctors Love LARS. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
LARS LigamentWhat’s the fuss all about?
Media Love LARS
• “Miracle op to melt down surgeons' phones”
• “Is LARS revolution about to start?”
• “Rodan's LARS recovery stuns coaches”
• “Rodan back two weeks after knee surgery”
Players, Coaches and Clubs Love LARS
Club Doctors Love LARS
• "It's a ridiculous recovery,“ • "This will become the norm"
High Level of Patients Awareness
• Asking for them or about them.
Lots of Hype – Evidence based answers
• Should we be incorporating this graft into our practice?– Better than autograft?– Durability?– Do they cause OA?– Can they be revised?
• Which patients should it be used on?– Any Specific Advantages?– Optimal time to insert?
LIGAMENT ADVANCEDREINFORCEMENT SYSTEM (LARS) ARTIFICIAL LIGAMENT
• Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET).
• PET - Encourage ingrowth
• Intra-articular segment– Twist
Methods
• A systemic review process was undertaken
• Any article reporting on outcomes of the LARS ligament
10 Specific Outcomes Measures
• Loss of Range of motion (flexion or extension loss > 5 degree) • Lachman Grade >II• Pivot shift grade >II• IKDC score (% of patients scored A or B)• Lysholm score and Tegner Score• KT-1000• Muscle strength (flexion and extension strength), • Surgery Complications
– Specifically graft rupture or revision, – synovitis – osteoarthritis
LARS Literature
• 12 papers found reporting on the LARS
• 6 publications in Chinese literature.
• 4 compared to autograft (1 PT 3 HT)
12 LARS Papers
• Total 655 LARS grafts.
• Methodology – retrospective case series.
• Av. Age patients 21 – 46• Av. Time to surgery 7 months• Av. Follow up 28 months (4-60 months)
Reported Outcomes• Lachman grade
– 12% Grade II or more (60 of 499 grafts, 7 articles)
• Pivot shift– 5% grade II or more (20 of 515 grafts, 7 articles)
• 14 reported ruptures (2%)
• Lysholm Post op value of 82.8 – 98.7
• 1 case synovitis reported
Article YearJournal
Number Av Age Time to surgery
Av F/UMonths
1 Derricks 1995Operative techniques Sports
Medicine 220 33.4 30
2 Lavoie 2000 Knee 47 31.6 22
3 Duval ** 2002 JBJS 26 31 5 24
4 Qi S 2005 Chin J Min Inv Surg 16 33.7 19 4
5 Chen S ** 2007 Chin J Sports Med 23 28.2 2 15
6 Dong 2007 Chin J Orthop Trauma 21 35.7 1.5 9
7 Cerelli 2007 SIOT 25 46 10 60
8 Fan** 2008Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian
Wai Ke Za Zhi 15 18
9 Liu ** 2009 International Orthopaedics 28 36 8 49
10 Chen M 2009Chin J Reparative and Recon
Surgery 32 21 3.2 24
11 Gao 2010 Arthroscopy 159 30 5 50
12 Huang 2010 Chin Medical Journal 43 29
655 21-46 6.7 27.8
4 Comparison Papers
• No difference in the 10 outcome measures at final follow up (15 – 49 months).
• LARS patients reached full recovery sooner.
Correspondence Dr Nicolas Duval
• Best results are in early ACL repair augmented by LARS – Expect 80 to 90% good results at 10 years.
• Chronic ACL tear - 50% failure at 10 years
• Revision ACL surgery - 40% failure at 10 years.
Is there an optimal time to insert?
• acute injuries • good ACL stump • well vascularised
Tissue Ingrowth• 2 Papers • Yu – (Chinese) Rabbits
– If the stump was left - Connective tissue covering– at 6 months irregular collagen bundles with no
mature ligamentisation.
• Trieb– Invitro cellular ingrowth into LARS– Invivo – Ingrowth in a quads tendon.
Long Term Results LARS
Other PET grafts– Stryker Graft– Proflex– Lygeon– Leeds-Keio– ABC Surgicraft – Ligastic
Poor Results
• High failure rates
• Poor Outcome Scores (Lachman, Pivot, IKDC)
• Concerns regarding development of OA
Pittsburgh Group
Electron Microscopy
Conclusion• There is sparse and poor quality literature
• Early results of LARS good.
• Faster recovery but NOT BETTER than autograft.
• Concern based on previous PET grafts possibility late failure and iatrogenic OA
Recommendations
• Reporting and follow up is important.
• Randomised trials.
• Patients - informed of our knowledge of LARS.
• Need for ACL register?
Thankyou