Suppr超能文献

关节镜下单束前交叉韧带重建的结果:前内侧入路技术与经胫骨钻孔技术的比较

Outcome of arthroscopic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: anteromedial portal technique versus transtibial drilling technique.

作者信息

Rezazadeh S, Ettehadi H, Vosoughi A R

机构信息

Bone and Joint Diseases Research Center, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Chamran Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

International Branch of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Marvdasht, Iran.

出版信息

Musculoskelet Surg. 2016 Apr;100(1):37-41. doi: 10.1007/s12306-015-0392-x. Epub 2015 Dec 8.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Controversies exist about the femoral tunnel preparation technique in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgeries. The aim of this study was to evaluate mid-term outcomes of transtibial (TT) technique in comparison with anteromedial portal (AMP) one.

METHODS

Demographic data, height, weight, period of time from injury to surgery, and follow-up duration of patients underwent ACL reconstruction using single-bundle hamstring graft by the senior author between 2007 and 2011 were evaluated, retrospectively. Mid-quadriceps circumference difference, passive range of motion of the joint, anterior drawer test, Lachman test, and pivot shift test were assessed for each case. Function of the knee joint was calculated using International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm, and Tegner scores.

RESULTS

Of 50 cases in the AMP group (age 30.6 ± 6.5), 45 were male and of the 44 patients in the TT group (age 30.0 ± 6.5), forty were male. Mean follow-up times in the AMP and TT group were 18.2 months (range 12-84 months) and 25.7 months (range 16-48 months), respectively. No statistically significant difference was found in mid-quadriceps circumference difference (P = 0.861). Also, functional knee scores (P values of IKDC = 0.329, Lysholm score = 0.08, Tegner = 0.504) and stability tests (P values of anterior drawer test = 0.07, Lachman test = 0.486, pivot shift test = 0.348) did not differ statistically between groups.

CONCLUSION

There is no superiority of AMP technique on TT technique in ACL reconstructive surgeries. It could be suggested that performing a well-done technique, either TT or AMP, may be more important than only choosing a technique.

摘要

目的

在前交叉韧带(ACL)重建手术中,股骨隧道制备技术存在争议。本研究的目的是评估经胫骨(TT)技术与前内侧入路(AMP)技术的中期疗效。

方法

回顾性评估2007年至2011年间由资深作者使用单束腘绳肌移植物进行ACL重建的患者的人口统计学数据、身高、体重、受伤至手术的时间以及随访时间。对每例患者评估股四头肌中点周径差异、关节被动活动范围、前抽屉试验、Lachman试验和轴移试验。使用国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)、Lysholm和Tegner评分计算膝关节功能。

结果

AMP组50例患者(年龄30.6±6.5岁)中,45例为男性;TT组44例患者(年龄30.0±6.5岁)中,40例为男性。AMP组和TT组的平均随访时间分别为18.2个月(范围12 - 84个月)和25.7个月(范围16 - 48个月)。股四头肌中点周径差异无统计学显著差异(P = 0.861)。此外,膝关节功能评分(IKDC的P值 = 0.329,Lysholm评分 = 0.08,Tegner = 0.504)和稳定性试验(前抽屉试验的P值 = 0.07,Lachman试验 = 0.486,轴移试验 = 0.348)在两组之间也无统计学差异。

结论

在ACL重建手术中,AMP技术并不优于TT技术。可以认为,实施一项操作良好的技术,无论是TT技术还是AMP技术,可能比仅选择一种技术更为重要。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验