there was no significant difference in graft tear and synovial coverage. Radiologic findings comparing instability showed no significant difference. Conclusions: Even though adjustable-loop system's intended flexibility has possibility of loop lengthening and subsequent graft displacement, compared with fixed-loop system, both group provided good functional and radiologic outcomes without significant differences. Also the second-look arthroscopy revealed no difference in graft tear and synovial

more »

... coverage between fixedloop and adjustable-loop device. http://dx. Background: The purpose of this prospective randomized clinical study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes, including tibial tunnel widening and the progression of osteoarthritis after ACL reconstruction using a hamstring autograft or a tibialis allograft. In addition, we compared the graft tear, and synovial coverage of grafts in patients that underwent the second-look arthroscopy. Meterial and Method: Among 184 patients with an ACL injury underwent ACL reconstruction, 68 patients of autograft group and 64 patients of tibialis allograft group were included for this study after minimum of 2-year follow-up. The Lachman and pivot-shift tests, Tegner activity score, Lysholm knee score, and IKDC score were compared between the two groups. The quadriceps and hamstring isokinetic strengths using dynamometer were also compared. Degree of OA was determined using the Kellgren-Lawrence grading system on the weight-bearing radiographs. 51 patients (26 patients in autograft group and 25 in the tibialis allograft group) underwent the second-look arthroscopy, in which we compared the apparent tear of graft and synovial coverage of grafts. Results: At the final follow-up, there were no statistical significances in the two groups in Lachman and pivot-shift tests (n.s.). The Tegner activity, Lysholm knee score, and IKDC scores were similar in the two groups. Moreover, no significant differences were observed in the muscle powers (n.s.). Some patients showed the progression of OA (5 in autograft and 4 in allograft groups) without intergroup difference (n.s.). Regarding the findings of second-look arthroscopy, although there was no significant difference in graft tear, synovial coverage was better in autograft group than in allograft group. Conclusions: Even though hamstring autografts and tibialis allografts provided good functional outcomes without significant differences, the second-look arthroscopy revealed that hamstring autografts produced better synovial coverage than tibialis allograft. http://dx.