LAUSR

OBJECTIVE Pretensioning is usually done using two methods - manual cyclical loading and using tensioner with a tendon board. Both the methods are being used with little knowledge about the superiority of either method. This study was done with the objective of trying to find out the better method. METHODS A total of 50 patients were selected for the above mentioned study who were randomised into each of the two groups using chit system - In group A patients, cyclical loading was done by twenty times full flexion -extension movements but in group B patients, the graft was placed on a tensioner with 15 pounds tension for 10 minutes. All patients were operated by the same surgeon. The patients were put on a strict rehabilitation protocol. Patients were allowed to bear weight as tolerated. Patients returned for follow up at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months. At each visit patients were followed with Lysholm's Score and ROLIMETER reading. RESULTS The ROLIMETER reading and Lysholm's score were seen to improve from preoperative to postoperative period and improved further over time with the progress of the rehabilitation protocol in both the groups. When compared to each other Group A i.e. patients pretensioned with cyclical loading had better Lysholm scores and ROLIMETER readings with the difference being statistically significant at all time periods except at 1 year when the difference between the ROLIMETER readings in the two groups were no more significant, though the difference of the Lysholms score was still found to be statistically significant. CONCLUSION It was concluded in this study that cyclical loading is a better method of pretensioning in ACL reconstruction than tensioner on tendon board with 15 pounds of tension for 10 minutes.