Talk:Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Copyright problem
Text was moved from "ACL Reconstruction" to "ACL reconstruction". This is now erased since it appeared to be a copyright violation from --fnielsen 23:28, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Some bit new text on temporary page: --fnielsen 23:47, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Update

 * I just made a big update based mainly on my own knowledge from the surgery and some web sources. So, probably not everything is 100% accurate or complete, but I thought it'd be nice to get this article off to a start. Perhaps after I (re-)register I will have some pictures to post, too.-Luke--140.247.144.121 07:50, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Pictures
I have scanned some X-ray of my knee (reconstructed). You may like to add them into the article.

Greetings --Biopresto 07:34, 5 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you posted them. I don't feel it would be bad for you to directly add it to the article if you give some explanation of the surgery you had.  It would be even cooler if you had photos. Root4(one) 04:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Combination
This page should be made a part of ACL injury. There is already an ACL reconstruction section in the ACL injury page and this should replace that section.

Surgery Images
Hi,

In my site I have images from an acl reconstruction surgery. I think the images are of great value especially for someone who has to undergo such an operation. If you think so too feel free to add it in the external links section Nfostiras 15:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

http://surgery-images.com/orthopedic/anterior%20cruciate%20ligament.html

help
i have ruptured both my ACL and PCL i have also sustained a grade 3 tear in my MCL,can any one please let me know my best options. My surgeon has left me to "heal" for well over 12 weeks and he is now talking of not doing any reconstruction at all, should i take this action or damand surgery as i am (at least was) both a compettive skiier and horse rider, and i would like to return to both sports.amybabes71 6th march 2007


 * You understand a ligament rupture is not necessarily a complete tear, right? Therefore, unlike a complete tear, it has a chance to heal.  But if it bothers you significantly, you might want to get a second (Medical) opinion.  I'm not sure if time is a factor.


 * Never "demand" surgery. TV dramas often hide the details and make many types of surgery as if they're no-brainers.  Fact is, with ANY surgery  theres significant risks, esp. of infection.  How would you like to have a satisfactory reconstruction of the knee (should you need it) and then be overcome by septic infection that eats at the bone?   I'd almost guarantee your days as a competitive skier would be over then.  Root4(one) 12:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

ACL tears don't heal very well, if at all usually. Get a second opinion. A grade 3 tear is a complete tear. If you don't restore normal kinematics to your knee, studies show that you WILL develop arthritis much sooner than not. And if you continue to do pivoting sports on a loose knee, you're going to start damaging meniscus and cartilage. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.103.140.53 (talk • contribs).

future treatment
Using the previously first external link as a reference i wrote a section about it.Thus I moved it from external links to the references.I also added an external link videos from such operations.SInce english is not my mother language if you find any syntax or grammar errors please fix them.Also please make any other changes that maybe needed !


 * Removed it. This "Future Treatment" is more about ACL repair than reconstruction. Also, the procedure that you're referencing is way way wayyyyy too early to be even considered a reference to a future treatment. I would lean more towards the double-bundle ACL procedure by Doctor Fu in PA as a more relevant possible "future treatment". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.103.140.53 (talk • contribs).


 * Ok, someone keeps re-adding this section. Whatever. This section doesn't belong in this article in it's current state. - Bob —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.103.140.53 (talk • contribs)

History?
Can someone add a brief history of this operation. When and where did it first become available, what technology made it possible etc? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.79.170 (talk) 11:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

"high" success rate?
Shouldn't any such claims be quantified? Michael (talk) 07:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

ACL Rejection
My son had ACL replacement surgery in November. The incision below his knee on the tibia "ruptured" about three weeks after surgery. No infection was found. The wound continued to drain for over three months without ever closing. Physical therapy was going along normal to advanced. Just last week a "string" started poking out of the wound- the doctor removed this string- approximatley six inches long. That was the lead for the new tendon. Now, he may have to have the surgery AGAIN because the tunnel is overly large and they feel the graft is deteriorating. How common is this? Neither the surgeon nor my sons primary doctor have experienced this hands on before — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.3.32.53 (talk) 16:03, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Placement of Bridge Enhanced Repair
The sections discussing the hamstring tendon and patellar tendon autografts are under the Bridge Enhanced Repair section instead of the Autograft section. Is this intended? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.90.153.87 (talk) 07:23, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Bad sources or sources that should be replaced? Opinions needed.
Hello Everyone,

I am a student from the College of Dupage in Glen Ellyn, IL and as an English project I am to help better a Wikipedia article and this is the one I've chosen.

The first thing I noticed looking at this article was the banner at the top mentioning that there was not enough sources. I took it upon myself to first go through the current sources to see whether or not they were useful and/or credible.

Below you'll find which Source #'s I've found that needs replacing or to be taken from the article along with an explanation ask to why. I'm encouraging that anyone reading this to take a look at the sources and reasoning's I've included and give me feedback on whether or not you agree with me or believe that the source should be left alone:

Source 24 - Has no author, the survey was done by an unaccredited ACL blog page that lacks information on the study such as; how it was performed, how the surveyors were chosen, etc.

Source 23 - Article pertains to "Hip and Trunk" not the knees. Also, the article states that participants do not have ACL injuries or major lower extremity issues within last 3 months. In the end the study concluded that it “needs further research”.

Source 22 - Extra link trying to add to swimming to post procedure workouts. Not necessary. Article doesn't specifically mention the ACL or knee joint, only the muscles each stroke uses.

Source 9 - Page can no longer be found

Source 10 - This article has no author, no cited sources, “doctors” were mentioned without names or credibility.

Source 13 - Needs more information about author, dates, etc.

Source 14 - 404 not found error. (I am currently trying to find the information cited in the Wikipedia article elsewhere to replace this source, otherwise the stem cell section will need to be modified).

Source 15 - This site requires viewers to sign up and login to view information. This won't be very useful as many people won't sign up for a page to view a single article one time. (Currently trying to find this information elsewhere)

Source 16 - Article is about Bioreactors and bones. Previous contributor threw in false information applying it to the ACL when the source mentions nothing about the "ACL" or "Anterior Cruciate Ligament". (CTRL "F")

Source 17 - Once again, article is about Bioreactors. Previous contributor threw in false information applying it to the ACL when the source mentions nothing about the "ACL" or "Anterior Cruciate Ligament". (CTRL "F")

Source 18 - This source doesn't relate information to ligaments; it more so pertains to bone and cartilage. False information was also included into the statement.

If any of you agree or disagree with me, please let me know! All feedback is helpful and very much appreciated!

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TBernat59 (talk • contribs) 23:45, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for looking at the pages, TBernat59. Note that the reference numbers have changes since a recent merge in. Sounds like you've identified plenty of the problems that can quite reasonably be boldly fixed. For the referenced that don't support the findings, I'd replace with a trustworthy referenced, or delete the incorrect reference and add a citation needed template, or add a contested template. For those with broken links, consider seeing if one of the online archives has a copy and use Template:Webarchive. Klbrain (talk) 18:36, 13 August 2017 (UTC)