Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?

Surgical reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures has proven to be a highly effective technique that usually provides satisfactory results. However, despite the majority of patients recovering their function after this procedure, ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is still imperfect. To im...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Emerito Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	MDPI AG 2021
Materias:	anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction biological augmentation results Biology (General) QH301-705.5 Chemistry QD1-999
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/a6f377285a9846ae91e526145f248ac2
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:a6f377285a9846ae91e526145f248ac2
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:a6f377285a9846ae91e526145f248ac22021-11-25T17:57:56ZAnterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?10.3390/ijms2222125661422-00671661-6596https://doaj.org/article/a6f377285a9846ae91e526145f248ac22021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/22/22/12566https://doaj.org/toc/1661-6596https://doaj.org/toc/1422-0067Surgical reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures has proven to be a highly effective technique that usually provides satisfactory results. However, despite the majority of patients recovering their function after this procedure, ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is still imperfect. To improve these results, various biological augmentation (BA) techniques have been employed mostly in animal models. They include: (1) growth factors (bone morphogenetic protein, epidermal growth factor, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, basic fibroblast growth factor, transforming growth factor-β, hepatocyte growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and platelet concentrates such as platelet-rich plasma, fibrin clot, and autologous conditioned serum), (2) mesenchymal stem cells, (3) autologous tissue, (4) various pharmaceuticals (matrix metalloproteinase-inhibitor alpha-2-macroglobulin bisphosphonates), (5) biophysical/environmental methods (hyperbaric oxygen, low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, extracorporeal shockwave therapy), (6) biomaterials (fixation methods, biological coatings, biosynthetic bone substitutes, osteoconductive materials), and (7) gene therapy. All of them have shown good results in experimental studies; however, the clinical studies on BA published so far are highly heterogeneous and have a low degree of evidence. The most widely used technique to date is platelet-rich plasma. My position is that orthopedic surgeons must be very cautious when considering using PRP or other BA methods in ACLR.Emerito Carlos Rodríguez-MerchánMDPI AGarticleanterior cruciate ligamentreconstructionbiological augmentationresultsBiology (General)QH301-705.5ChemistryQD1-999ENInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences, Vol 22, Iss 12566, p 12566 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction biological augmentation results Biology (General) QH301-705.5 Chemistry QD1-999
spellingShingle	anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction biological augmentation results Biology (General) QH301-705.5 Chemistry QD1-999 Emerito Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?
description	Surgical reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures has proven to be a highly effective technique that usually provides satisfactory results. However, despite the majority of patients recovering their function after this procedure, ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is still imperfect. To improve these results, various biological augmentation (BA) techniques have been employed mostly in animal models. They include: (1) growth factors (bone morphogenetic protein, epidermal growth factor, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, basic fibroblast growth factor, transforming growth factor-β, hepatocyte growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and platelet concentrates such as platelet-rich plasma, fibrin clot, and autologous conditioned serum), (2) mesenchymal stem cells, (3) autologous tissue, (4) various pharmaceuticals (matrix metalloproteinase-inhibitor alpha-2-macroglobulin bisphosphonates), (5) biophysical/environmental methods (hyperbaric oxygen, low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, extracorporeal shockwave therapy), (6) biomaterials (fixation methods, biological coatings, biosynthetic bone substitutes, osteoconductive materials), and (7) gene therapy. All of them have shown good results in experimental studies; however, the clinical studies on BA published so far are highly heterogeneous and have a low degree of evidence. The most widely used technique to date is platelet-rich plasma. My position is that orthopedic surgeons must be very cautious when considering using PRP or other BA methods in ACLR.
format	article
author	Emerito Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán
author_facet	Emerito Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán
author_sort	Emerito Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán
title	Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?
title_short	Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?
title_full	Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?
title_fullStr	Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?
title_full_unstemmed	Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?
title_sort	anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: is biological augmentation beneficial?
publisher	MDPI AG
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/a6f377285a9846ae91e526145f248ac2
work_keys_str_mv	AT emeritocarlosrodriguezmerchan anteriorcruciateligamentreconstructionisbiologicalaugmentationbeneficial
_version_	1718411821451313152

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?

Ejemplares similares