Fowler Kennedy Sports Medicine Clinic, London, Ontario, Canada.
Western University, London, Canada.
Am J Sports Med. 2022 Mar;50(4):962-967. doi: 10.1177/03635465211070553. Epub 2022 Jan 31.
Different techniques to restore knee stability after posterolateral corner (PLC) injury have been described. The original anatomic PLC reconstruction uses 2 separate allografts to reconstruct the PLC. Access to allograft tissue continues to be a significant limitation of this technique, which led to the development of a modified anatomic approach utilizing a single autologous semitendinosus graft fixed on the tibia with an adjustable suspensory loop to enable differential tensioning of the PLC components.
PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to compare the modified anatomic technique with the original anatomic reconstruction in terms of varus and external rotatory laxity in a cadaveric biomechanical model. The hypothesis was that both techniques would restore varus and external rotatory laxity after a simulated complete PLC injury.
Controlled laboratory study.
Eight pairs of fresh-frozen cadaveric knee specimens were tested to compare the 2 techniques. Varus and external tibial rotation laxity of the knee were measured while applying 10-N·m varus and 5-N·m external rotatory torques at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion. These measurements were tested under 3 conditions: (1) intact fibular collateral ligament, popliteal tendon, and popliteofibular ligament; (2) complete transection of the fibular collateral ligament, popliteal tendon, and popliteofibular ligament; (3) after PLC reconstruction with either the modified (n = 8) or the original (n = 8) technique.
After PLC reconstruction, varus laxity was restored with no statistically significant differences from the intact condition after both reconstruction techniques. Similar outcomes were observed for external rotation in extension; however, in terms of the external rotation limit with respect to the intact joint, significant reductions of mean ± SD 4.1°± 6.3° ( = .036) and 5.1°± 6.6° ( = .016) were recorded with the modified technique at 60° and 90° of flexion, respectively. No significant effect was observed on the neutral flexion kinematics from 0° to 90° of flexion, and no significant differences were observed between reconstructions ( = .222).
Both PLC reconstruction techniques restored the normal native varus as compared with the intact knee. Although the modified technique constrained end-range external rotation at 60° and 90° of flexion, no differences were noted with neutral flexion kinematics. Care should be taken when tensioning in the modified technique so that the tibia is in a neutral position to avoid overconstraining the knee.
The modified technique may prove useful in situations where there are limited graft options, particularly where allografts are not available or are restricted.
已经描述了多种用于修复后外侧角(PLC)损伤后膝关节稳定性的技术。原始解剖 PLC 重建使用 2 个单独的同种异体移植物来重建 PLC。同种异体组织的获取仍然是该技术的一个重大限制,这导致了一种改良的解剖方法的发展,该方法使用单个自体半腱肌移植物固定在胫骨上,并带有可调节的悬挂环,以实现 PLC 成分的差异化拉紧。
目的/假设:本研究的目的是在尸体生物力学模型中比较改良解剖技术与原始解剖重建在膝内翻和外旋松弛方面的差异。假设这两种技术都可以在模拟的完全 PLC 损伤后恢复膝内翻和外旋松弛。
对照实验室研究。
对 8 对新鲜冷冻的尸体膝关节标本进行测试,比较两种技术。在 0°、30°、60°和 90°的屈曲下,施加 10-N·m 内翻和 5-N·m 外旋扭矩,测量膝关节的内翻和胫骨外旋松弛度。在以下 3 种情况下进行这些测量:(1)腓侧副韧带、腘肌腱和腓肠肌腓骨韧带完整;(2)腓侧副韧带、腘肌腱和腓肠肌腓骨韧带完全切断;(3)使用改良(n = 8)或原始(n = 8)技术进行 PLC 重建后。
PLC 重建后,两种重建技术的内翻松弛度均与完整状态无统计学差异。在伸展时的外旋也观察到类似的结果;然而,与完整关节相比,在外部旋转极限方面,改良技术在 60°和 90°屈曲时分别记录到平均(SD)4.1°±6.3°(=0.036)和 5.1°±6.6°(=0.016)的显著降低。在 0°至 90°的屈曲中立位屈伸运动中,没有观察到明显的影响,重建之间也没有观察到显著差异(=0.222)。
与正常膝关节相比,两种 PLC 重建技术均恢复了正常的内翻。虽然改良技术在 60°和 90°的屈曲时限制了末端外旋,但在中立位屈伸运动中没有差异。在改良技术中,应注意调整张力,以使胫骨处于中立位,以避免过度限制膝关节。
在同种异体移植物选择有限的情况下,特别是在无法获得同种异体移植物或受到限制的情况下,改良技术可能会证明有用。