Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 3471 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1010, Kaufmann Building, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Shenzhen 2nd People's Hospital (The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University), Guangdong, China.
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020 Aug;28(8):2687-2696. doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-05934-5. Epub 2020 Apr 27.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare knee kinematics and kinetics following either single bundle, modified triangular or double-bundle reconstruction of the superficial medial collateral ligament (sMCL) with single bundle anatomic ACL reconstruction.
Using a cadaveric model (n = 10), the knee kinematics and kinetics following three MCL reconstructions (single-bundle (SB), double-bundle (DB), modified triangular) with single bundle anatomic ACL reconstruction were compared with the intact and deficient knee state. The knees were tested under (1) an 89-N anterior tibial load, (2) 5 N-m internal and external rotational tibial torques, and (3) a 7 N-m valgus torque.
Anatomic ACL reconstruction with SB MCL reconstruction was able to restore anterior tibial translation and external rotation to intact knee values but failed to the internal and valgus rotatory stability. Anatomical DB MCL reconstruction (with SB ACL reconstruction) and the modified triangular MCL reconstruction (with SB ACL reconstruction) restored all knee kinematics to the intact value.
This study shows that clinical presentation with combined ACL and severe sMCL injury, single-bundle MCL with single-bundle ACL reconstruction does not restore knee kinematics. Anatomical double-bundle MCL reconstruction may produce slightly better biomechanical stability than the modified triangular MCL reconstruction, but the modified triangular reconstruction might be more clinically practical with the advantages of being less invasive and technically simpler while at the same time can restore a nearly normal knee joint.
本研究旨在评估和比较单纯前内侧束(sMCL)单束重建、改良三束重建和双束重建后膝关节的运动学和动力学,同时与单纯前交叉韧带(ACL)解剖重建进行比较。
使用尸体模型(n=10),比较三种 MCL 重建(单束重建、双束重建、改良三束重建)与单纯前交叉韧带解剖重建后膝关节的运动学和动力学,同时与完整和缺陷膝关节状态进行比较。膝关节在以下三种情况下进行测试:(1)89-N 的胫骨前负荷;(2)5 N-m 的内、外旋转胫骨扭矩;(3)7 N-m 的外翻扭矩。
单纯前交叉韧带解剖重建结合 sMCL 重建可以恢复胫骨前向位移和外旋至正常膝关节水平,但无法恢复内旋和外翻旋转稳定性。解剖学双束 MCL 重建(结合 SB ACL 重建)和改良三束 MCL 重建(结合 SB ACL 重建)可以将所有膝关节运动学恢复到正常水平。
本研究表明,对于合并 ACL 和严重 sMCL 损伤的临床表现,单纯前交叉韧带解剖重建联合单束 MCL 重建并不能恢复膝关节运动学。解剖学双束 MCL 重建可能比改良三束 MCL 重建产生稍好的生物力学稳定性,但改良三束重建可能更具临床实用性,具有微创和技术更简单的优势,同时可以恢复接近正常的膝关节。