The Wound Dressing Influenced Effectiveness of Cryotherapy After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Case–Control Study Comparing Gauze Versus Film Dressing

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the clinical effectiveness of cryotherapy after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using 2 different wound dressings, conventional postoperative gauze dressings and polyurethane semipermeable transparent film dressings. Methods: In total, 60 patients who had undergone arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with an autogenous patellar tendon were assigned to 2 groups. The surgical wound was covered with 5 sheets of gauze with an elastic bandage (control group) in 30 patients and film dressing was used (film group) in the remaining 30 patients. Silicone drainage catheters were inserted at the intercondylar notch, beside the distal outlet of the tibial tunnel for 2 days. After 1 hour of cooling using the device, the knee was chilled with an ice bag every 2 hours until the next morning. The severity of pain was evaluated by the number of times an analgesic, 50 mg of diclofenac sodium suppositories, had to be administered in the 24 hours after surgery. The amount of drainage during the following 2 days, the range of motion at 21 days, the change of hemoglobin concentration at 1 and 7 days, and C-reactive protein (CRP) at 1 and 7 days were examined. Results: The number of patients who used an analgesic was 18 in the control group and 7 in the film group (P = .003). The amount of drainage was 165.2 ± 72.9 mL in the control group and 289.7 ± 77.6 mL in the film group (P < .001). The postoperative CRP value was 0.77 ± 0.65 mg/dL at 1 day in the control group and 0.39 ± 0.42 mg/dL in the film group (P = .009). No statistical difference was seen for hemoglobin concentration at 1 or 7 days, CRP at 7 days or range of motion at 21 days. Conclusions: In this study, we found that film dressing enhanced the effect of cryotherapy with respect to pain control, wound drainage, and inflammation immediately after surgery compared with traditional gauze dressing with elastic wrap. Level of Evidence: III, case–control study.