AJ Watch

**S.S. Bleeder** · 17th August 2018, 09:23 AM

Originally Posted by stevoswan

Well, that was a lot to write and digest. Would have probably been far easier to just admit you were a bit harsh and we all could have moved on.....never thought I'd see the day when a woman is not impressed with a bloke crying.

Or, you and velour and ruffles could admit you were wrong for making assumptions that Annie inferred he was a poof when we all know she never said or inferred that? Then we can all move on.

**neilfws** · 17th August 2018, 09:24 AM

Getting back to the knee - interesting article this morning about LARS (mentions AJ, Shaw, Malceski), and how it's no longer seen as the miracle procedure.

Whatever happened to LARS? The miracle cure that was too good to be true - Sport - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

**goswannies** · 17th August 2018, 11:21 AM

Originally Posted by neilfws

Getting back to the knee - interesting article this morning about LARS (mentions AJ, Shaw, Malceski), and how it's no longer seen as the miracle procedure.

Whatever happened to LARS? The miracle cure that was too good to be true - Sport - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

One thing that is often overlooked in the LARS debates is the initial intention of the graft.

LARS is an acronym for Ligament Augmentation and Reconstruction System. The artificial LARS graft can be used in one of two ways.

1) as a “stand alone” reconstruction (ie it’s a synthetic ligament that just replaces the torn ACL) in which case it’s similar to every other synthetic graft and prone to failure. The advantage is the quick recovery as stated in the article you linked. It’s also possibly better than the older carbon fibre synthetic grafts that degraded and left micro particles that the body reacted to.

2) LARS ligaments can be used in conjunction with suturing to the remaining section of the ruptured ligament (or perhaps augmenting an autologous patella tendon / hamstring graft). This is the true benefit of a LARS graft. You get the benefit of early strength provided by the synthetic ligament when the healing ACL is biologically at its weakest, but you will get the strength of a fully healed ACL at later stages of rehab when a synthetic graft may not be strong enough to withstand the rigours of sport.

Unfortunately it was more commonly used the first way.

**Doctor** · 17th August 2018, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by goswannies

One thing that is often overlooked in the LARS debates is the initial intention of the graft.

LARS is an acronym for Ligament Augmentation and Reconstruction System. The artificial LARS graft can be used in one of two ways.

1) as a “stand alone” reconstruction (ie it’s a synthetic ligament that just replaces the torn ACL) in which case it’s similar to every other synthetic graft and prone to failure. The advantage is the quick recovery as stated in the article you linked. It’s also possibly better than the older carbon fibre synthetic grafts that degraded and left micro particles that the body reacted to.

2) LARS ligaments can be used in conjunction with suturing to the remaining section of the ruptured ligament (or perhaps augmenting an autologous patella tendon / hamstring graft). This is the true benefit of a LARS graft. You get the benefit of early strength provided by the synthetic ligament when the healing ACL is biologically at its weakest, but you will get the strength of a fully healed ACL at later stages of rehab when a synthetic graft may not be strong enough to withstand the rigours of sport.

Unfortunately it was more commonly used the first way.

So if used the second way, does it still decrease recovery time or is the main benefit that it aids healing during that six-twelve week period post surgery when the graft is at it's weakest?

**AnnieH** · 17th August 2018, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by goswannies

One thing that is often overlooked in the LARS debates is the initial intention of the graft.

LARS is an acronym for Ligament Augmentation and Reconstruction System. The artificial LARS graft can be used in one of two ways.

1) as a “stand alone” reconstruction (ie it’s a synthetic ligament that just replaces the torn ACL) in which case it’s similar to every other synthetic graft and prone to failure. The advantage is the quick recovery as stated in the article you linked. It’s also possibly better than the older carbon fibre synthetic grafts that degraded and left micro particles that the body reacted to.

2) LARS ligaments can be used in conjunction with suturing to the remaining section of the ruptured ligament (or perhaps augmenting an autologous patella tendon / hamstring graft). This is the true benefit of a LARS graft. You get the benefit of early strength provided by the synthetic ligament when the healing ACL is biologically at its weakest, but you will get the strength of a fully healed ACL at later stages of rehab when a synthetic graft may not be strong enough to withstand the rigours of sport.

Unfortunately it was more commonly used the first way.

You should go into medicine.

**goswannies** · 17th August 2018, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by Doctor

So if used the second way, does it still decrease recovery time or is the main benefit that it aids healing during that six-twelve week period post surgery when the graft is at it's weakest?

A little bit of column A, much more of column B

It allows you to do more during that early period (when the graft would be at greater risk of compromise) which advances things for the later period.

The graft was first developed in France and the rehab protocol that they developed in conjunction does accelerate things. However it doesn’t take into account the unique rigours of Aussie sports such as football or netball.

**goswannies** · 17th August 2018, 12:21 PM

Originally Posted by AnnieH

You should go into medicine.

What?! ... and earn a decent wage and be able to retire before I’m 70? And not get the blame when things go wrong or get recognition for my efforts when things go well? Why on earth would I want to enjoy that lifestyle?

**Industrial Fan** · 17th August 2018, 12:36 PM

Originally Posted by S.S. Bleeder

Nice. I got Juniors. For sentimental reasons more so than an investment. I bought it for my mum. Her dad wore no.12 in the 1918 premiership. I think AJs could turn out to be a good buy in the long run.

Its not an investment, I'm giving it back to AJ

**AnnieH** · 17th August 2018, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by Industrial Fan

Its not an investment, I'm giving it back to AJ

Oh bless IF.
I'm a little teary... but that's ok. I'm a chick.

**goswannies** · 17th August 2018, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by S.S. Bleeder

Nice. I got Juniors. For sentimental reasons more so than an investment. I bought it for my mum. Her dad wore no.12 in the 1918 premiership. I think AJs could turn out to be a good buy in the long run.

Originally Posted by Industrial Fan

Its not an investment, I'm giving it back to AJ

The two best posts on this topic!!

**KTigers** · 17th August 2018, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by goswannies

What?! ... and earn a decent wage and be able to retire before I’m 70? And not get the blame when things go wrong or get recognition for my efforts when things go well? Why on earth would I want to enjoy that lifestyle?

I think you are about half right on this one mate. Yes, they earn good money and most are semi-retired before they hit 60, partially because
they can get blamed when things don't go so well, and get very little recognition when things go okay. I reckon Alex should give it another go.

**goswannies** · 17th August 2018, 01:06 PM

Originally Posted by KTigers

I think you are about half right on this one mate. Yes, they earn good money and most are semi-retired before they hit 60, partially because they can get blamed
when things don't go so well, and get very little recognition when things go okay.

Just comparing their profession to my job

(& more that AnnieH knows me - certainly don’t begrudge the docs their well deserved income)