Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Wilhelms University Muenster, Germany.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2010 Aug;130(8):1019-26. doi: 10.1007/s00402-010-1081-8. Epub 2010 Mar 9.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of single-bundle (SB) and anatomic double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction on the resulting knee kinematics in a simulated clinical setting with ACL rupture and associated extra-articular damage to the lateral structures. It was hypothesized that anatomic DB ACL reconstruction restores the intact knee kinematics in ACL/LCL-deficient knees, whereas SB ACL reconstruction fails to restore the intact knee kinematics.
Ten fresh-frozen human cadaver knees were subjected to anterior tibial load of 134 N (simulated KT 1000) and combined rotatory load of 10-Nm valgus and 4-Nm internal tibial torque (simulated pivot shift) using a robotic/UFS testing system. The resulting knee kinematics was determined for intact, ACL/LCL-deficient, SB ACL-reconstructed/LCL-deficient, and DB ACL-reconstructed/LCL-deficient knee. Statistical analysis was performed using a two-way ANOVA test with the level of significance set at P < 0.05.
Under a simulated KT 1000 test, anterior tibial translation (ATT) following SB ACL reconstruction was statistically significant at 0 degrees , 30 degrees and 60 degrees of knee flexion when compared to the intact knee. ATT after DB ACL reconstruction showed no statistically significant difference from the intact knee; however, there was a significant difference in SB reconstruction at 0 degrees and 30 degrees of knee flexion. Under a simulated pivot shift test, both SB and DB ACL reconstruction failed to restore the intact knee kinematics.
The results of the study did not support our initial hypothesis. Though DB reconstructions were significantly superior to SB reconstruction under simulated KT 1000 test, SB as well as DB reconstruction failed to restore the intact kinematics under simulated pivot shift loads. The clinical relevance of this study is that caution and precise preoperative diagnostics are needed to avoid failure of intra-articular ACL reconstruction if the extra-articular stabilizers are torn.
本研究旨在评估在模拟临床环境中,前交叉韧带(ACL)断裂并伴有外侧结构关节外损伤的情况下,单束(SB)和解剖双束(DB)前交叉韧带重建对膝关节运动学的影响。假设解剖 DB ACL 重建可恢复 ACL/LCL 缺失膝关节的完整膝关节运动学,而 SB ACL 重建则无法恢复完整膝关节运动学。
使用机器人/UFS 测试系统,对 10 个新鲜冷冻人体膝关节施加 134N 的胫骨前负荷(模拟 KT 1000)和 10N·m 的外翻和 4N·m 的胫骨内旋扭矩的复合旋转负荷(模拟前抽屉试验)。确定完整、ACL/LCL 缺失、SB ACL 重建/LCL 缺失和 DB ACL 重建/LCL 缺失膝关节的膝关节运动学。使用双因素方差分析检验进行统计分析,显著性水平设为 P < 0.05。
在模拟 KT 1000 测试下,与完整膝关节相比,SB ACL 重建后的胫骨前移位(ATT)在 0 度、30 度和 60 度膝关节屈曲时具有统计学意义。DB ACL 重建后的 ATT 与完整膝关节无统计学差异;然而,在 0 度和 30 度膝关节屈曲时,SB 重建存在显著差异。在模拟前抽屉试验下,SB 和 DB ACL 重建均未能恢复完整膝关节运动学。
研究结果不支持我们最初的假设。尽管 DB 重建在模拟 KT 1000 测试下明显优于 SB 重建,但在模拟前抽屉试验下,SB 和 DB 重建均无法恢复完整的运动学。本研究的临床意义在于,如果关节外稳定器撕裂,需要谨慎和精确的术前诊断,以避免关节内 ACL 重建失败。