moltzens injury?

[super_coach]

With Lui one week or two away from a return I think Sheens will either go with the Fitzmongrel or Flanagan or maybe fulton with benji playing 7. Iam a little worried as the dogs will be primed for a big one and the week after we have Panthers away ( who we struggle with anytime and anywhere). So we could loose two from two.
I see this as a must win game if we are going to be serious contenders for a top four finish, and its far from in the bag.

 

[magpie guy]

I hope like hell shines gives lazarus a go and keeps fitz away from the halves...

I know its out of left field but lets replace a half-back with a half-back shall we?

Id also much rather see tomato on the bench instead of fitzy. Tbh though we dont even need a back on the bench with flanagan and fulton able to cover several positions if need be and they would be a damn sight better than fitz.

 

[magpie_man]

if fitzy is named in the halves i will literally break-down and cry.

 

[Bricey]

one thing to remember is that with the lars procedure, there has not been any test done on long term recovery over 10 15 years for sports people. Maybe for older people who will not put the ligament under stress it is OK however.

That is due to the fact that the LARS ligament repair has been only available for the last 5-6 years.

Another factor is that since the ligament is synthetic it may get rejected from the graft causing many other issues.

The LARS system REPLACES the torn ACL ligament, not grafted to it

Also whilst the lars procedure has been used is Europe mainly the US has not taken to it yet, and our doctors are much in line with US doctors, so as such most specialists will do the hamstring graft until more long term research is done.

part of the reason why the traditional hamstring ACL repair takes so long to recover from is that you are taking a HAMSTRING ligament and grafting it to a knee to make it an ACL (Anterior Cruiciate Ligament). It will be taking weight that it isnt designed for, so therefore the recovery period is slow, allowing the graft to slowly build up to its new expectations

a LARS is specifically designed to replace the torn ACL, therefore it is designed to take the weight and strain of normal knee function.

the procedure will take approx. 45 minutes arthroscopically, where as a hamstring ACL will take about twice the time, given that they have to harvest the graft.

a few stats on the LARS are

http://www.larsligament.com/LARS-advantages.html

ADVANTAGES OF THE LARS® ARTIFICIAL LIGAMENT

Rapid Recovery

• Minimal invasive surgery;
• No long period of immobilization required;
• Full range of motion after 3 weeks;
• No muscular atrophy.

Less Pain


Based on studies:

• 90% of patients feel no pain postoperatively.

Less Swelling


Based on studies:

• 95% of patients have no swelling or light swelling tendencies postoperatively.

Less Restriction


Based on studies:

• 86% of patients have no minimal restrictions postoperatively;
• No patients report moderate to severe restrictions postoperatively.

 

[tigers_are_premiers]

That is due to the fact that the LARS ligament repair has been only available for the last 5-6 years.

The LARS system REPLACES the torn ACL ligament, not grafted to it


part of the reason why the traditional hamstring ACL repair takes so long to recover from is that you are taking a HAMSTRING ligament and grafting it to a knee to make it an ACL (Anterior Cruiciate Ligament). It will be taking weight that it isnt designed for, so therefore the recovery period is slow, allowing the graft to slowly build up to its new expectations

a LARS is specifically designed to replace the torn ACL, therefore it is designed to take the weight and strain of normal knee function.

the procedure will take approx. 45 minutes arthroscopically, where as a hamstring ACL will take about twice the time, given that they have to harvest the graft.

a few stats on the LARS are

http://www.larsligament.com/LARS-advantages.html

I totally agree with you.... Looks really really promising..

 

[phenisha]

That is due to the fact that the LARS ligament repair has been only available for the last 5-6 years.

This is incorrect, they have been used overseas for over 15 years.

The LARS system REPLACES the torn ACL ligament, not grafted to it

You still have to anchor the replaced ligament to the bone. It still requires drilling through the tibia and femur to anchor the lars ligament, so this is seen a 2 leg fractures
no matter what type of reconstruction is used.

part of the reason why the traditional hamstring ACL repair takes so long to recover from is that you are taking a HAMSTRING ligament and grafting it to a knee to make it an ACL (Anterior Cruiciate Ligament). It will be taking weight that it isnt designed for, so therefore the recovery period is slow, allowing the graft to slowly build up to its new expectations

I will not deny this, however reports show that after 24 months people with traditional reconstructions performed better. (I did my research on ankle injuries - so may not be 100% accurate with knees, but i assume so)

a LARS is specifically designed to replace the torn ACL, therefore it is designed to take the weight and strain of normal knee function.

the procedure will take approx. 45 minutes arthroscopically, where as a hamstring ACL will take about twice the time, given that they have to harvest the graft.

With hamstring grafts the tendons are threaded together to become stronger than they originally were, so i don't accept this point either, and as my original post said no one knows how the ligaments age for professional sports people putting the ligaments under extreme forces for long periods of time.

As far as the time of the operation goes, yes this is true.

I still think that Tim will go for a traditional reconstruction due to the long term effects being known.