Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Epstein Family Center for Sports Medicine at Keck Medicine of USC, 1520 San Pablo St #2000, Los Angeles, CA, 90033, USA.
Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington Hospital Center, 110 Irving St NW, Washington, DC, 20010, USA.
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2024 Jan;34(1):303-309. doi: 10.1007/s00590-023-03575-1. Epub 2023 Jul 25.
To compare the postoperative outcomes between Internal Brace (IB) and non-IB patients who underwent surgical management of multiple-ligament knee injuries (MLKI).
Patients who underwent surgical management of MLKI at two institutions between 2010 and 2020 were identified and offered participation in the study via the collection of postoperative functional outcomes for MLKI; Lysholm Knee score, Multiligament Quality of Life (ML-QOL), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computer adaptive testing (CAT), Pain Interference (PI), Physical Function (PF), and Mobility instruments (MI). The postoperative outcomes and reoperation rates were compared between the IB group and non-IB group.
One hundred and twenty-six patients were analyzed; 89 were included in the IB group (31.5% female; age 35.6 ± 1.4 years), and 37 were included in the non-IB group (25.7% female; age 38.8 ± 2.4 years). Mean follow-up time of the entire cohort was 37.9 ± 4.7 months [IB: 21.8 + 1.63; non-IB: 76.4 ± 6.2, p < 0.001). The IB group achieved similar PROMIS CAT [PROMIS Pain (51.8 + 1.1 vs. 52.1 + 1.6, p = 0.8736), Physical Function (46.6 + 1.2 vs. 46.4 + 1.8, p = 0.9168), Mobility (46.0 + 1.0 vs. 43.7 + 1.6, p = 0.2185)], ML-QOL [ML-QOL Physical Impairment (36.6 + 2.5 vs. 43.5 ± 4.2, p = 0.1485), Emotional Impairment (42.5 + 2.9 vs. 48.6 ± 4.6, p = 0.2695), Activity Limitation (34.5 + 2.8 vs. 36.2 ± 4.3, p = 0.7384), Societal Involvement (39.1 + 3.0 vs. 41.7 + 4.2, p = 0.6434)] and Lysholm knee score (64.9 + 2.5 vs. 60.4 + 4.0, p = 0.3397) postoperatively compared the non-IB group, but the differences were not significant.
In this cohort of patients with MLKI treated with versus without IB, outcomes and reoperation rates trended toward favoring IB, but the study was not sufficiently powered to reach statistical significance. Internal bracing could be useful in the management of MLKI. In the future, matched patient cohorts with more patients are warranted to further evaluate the clinical impact of the internal brace in MLKI.
比较接受多韧带膝关节损伤(MLKI)手术治疗的内置支具(IB)和非内置支具患者的术后结果。
在两个机构中,对 2010 年至 2020 年间接受 MLKI 手术治疗的患者进行了识别,并通过收集 MLKI 术后功能结果来提供参与研究的机会;Lysholm 膝关节评分、多韧带生活质量(ML-QOL)、患者报告的结果测量信息系统(PROMIS)计算机自适应测试(CAT)、疼痛干扰(PI)、身体功能(PF)和活动能力(MI)。比较 IB 组和非 IB 组之间的术后结果和再次手术率。
共分析了 126 例患者,89 例纳入 IB 组(31.5%女性;年龄 35.6±1.4 岁),37 例纳入非 IB 组(25.7%女性;年龄 38.8±2.4 岁)。整个队列的平均随访时间为 37.9±4.7 个月[IB:21.8±1.63;非 IB:76.4±6.2,p<0.001)。IB 组在 PROMIS CAT 方面取得了相似的结果[PROMIS 疼痛(51.8±1.1 与 52.1±1.6,p=0.8736)、身体功能(46.6±1.2 与 46.4±1.8,p=0.9168)、活动能力(46.0±1.0 与 43.7±1.6,p=0.2185)]、ML-QOL[ML-QOL 身体损伤(36.6±2.5 与 43.5±4.2,p=0.1485)、情绪损伤(42.5±2.9 与 48.6±4.6,p=0.2695)、活动受限(34.5±2.8 与 36.2±4.3,p=0.7384)、社会参与(39.1±3.0 与 41.7±4.2,p=0.6434)]和 Lysholm 膝关节评分(64.9±2.5 与 60.4±4.0,p=0.3397),但差异无统计学意义。
在本队列中,接受 MLKI 治疗的患者与接受 IB 治疗的患者相比,结果和再次手术率倾向于支持 IB,但该研究的效力不足以达到统计学意义。内置支具在 MLKI 的治疗中可能是有用的。在未来,需要更多患者的匹配患者队列来进一步评估内置支具在 MLKI 中的临床影响。