Deichsel Adrian, Oeckenpöhler Simon, Raschke Michael J, Grunenberg Ole, Peez Christian, Briese Thorben, Herbst Elmar, Kittl Christoph, Glasbrenner Johannes
Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Muenster, Albert-Schweitzer-Campus 1, Building W1, 48149 Münster, Germany.
J Clin Med. 2023 Jul 9;12(14):4567. doi: 10.3390/jcm12144567.
The Purpose of the present study was to assess the outcome of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with an accelerated rehabilitation protocol and to compare it to a conservative rehabilitation protocol. It was hypothesized that an accelerated rehabilitation protocol, including brace-free early weight bearing, would result in a higher rate of recurrent instability and revision surgery compared to a conservative rehabilitation protocol.
From 2016 to 2017, two different rehabilitation protocols for isolated ACLR were used at a high-volume knee surgery center. A total of 65 consecutive patients with isolated hamstring ACLR, of whom = 33 had been treated with an accelerated (AccRehab) and = 32 with a conservative rehabilitation protocol (ConRehab), were retrospectively included in the study. Patients were evaluated for recurrent instability, revision surgery, and other complications at a mean follow-up period of 64 ± 7.4 months. In addition, Tegner Activity Scale, Lysholm Score, and IKDC-subjective Score were evaluated. Statistical comparison between the two groups was performed utilizing Fisher's exact test and Student's t-test.
Mean age (29.3 vs. 26.6 years) and preoperative Tegner Score (6.4 vs. 5.9) were comparable between both groups. At 64 ± 7.4 months after ACLR, six cases of recurrent instability were reported in the AccRehab group (18%) in comparison to three cases (9%) in the ConRehab group ( = n.s.). There was no significant difference regarding revision surgery and further complications. Furthermore, no significant difference was found between both groups regarding Tegner (5.5 ± 1.9 vs. 5.5 ± 1.2), Lysholm (93.6 ± 6.3 vs. 89.3 ± 10.7), and IKDC score (89.7 ± 7.9 vs. 86.7 ± 12.1).
No significant disadvantage of an accelerated rehabilitation protocol following ACLR was found in terms of recurrent instability rate, revision surgery, or patient-reported outcome. However, a trend towards a higher reinstability rate was found for an accelerated rehabilitation protocol. Future level one trials evaluating brace-free early weight bearing following ACLR are desirable.
本研究的目的是评估采用加速康复方案进行前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)的结果,并将其与保守康复方案进行比较。研究假设,与保守康复方案相比,包括无支具早期负重的加速康复方案会导致更高的复发性不稳定率和翻修手术率。
2016年至2017年,一家高容量膝关节手术中心采用了两种不同的孤立性ACLR康复方案。共有65例连续的孤立性腘绳肌ACLR患者,其中33例接受了加速康复方案(AccRehab)治疗,32例接受了保守康复方案(ConRehab)治疗,被回顾性纳入研究。在平均随访期64±7.4个月时,对患者的复发性不稳定、翻修手术和其他并发症进行评估。此外,还评估了Tegner活动量表、Lysholm评分和IKDC主观评分。两组之间的统计比较采用Fisher精确检验和Student t检验。
两组的平均年龄(29.3岁对26.6岁)和术前Tegner评分(6.4对5.9)相当。在ACLR后64±7.4个月时,AccRehab组报告了6例复发性不稳定(18%),而ConRehab组为3例(9%)(P=无统计学意义)。翻修手术和进一步并发症方面无显著差异。此外,两组在Tegner评分(5.5±1.9对5.5±1.2)、Lysholm评分(93.6±6.3对89.3±10.7)和IKDC评分(89.7±7.9对86.7±12.1)方面也未发现显著差异。
在复发性不稳定率、翻修手术或患者报告的结果方面,未发现ACLR后加速康复方案有显著劣势。然而,加速康复方案有复发性不稳定率更高的趋势。未来需要进行一级试验来评估ACLR后无支具早期负重情况。