...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders >Comparison of clinical results of anteromedial and transtibial femoral tunnel drilling in ACL reconstruction
【24h】

Comparison of clinical results of anteromedial and transtibial femoral tunnel drilling in ACL reconstruction

机译:ACL重建主导和宁静股隧道钻探的临床结果比较

获取原文
           

摘要

A femoral bone tunnel in ACL reconstruction can be constructed from the outside in or from the inside out. When doing it inside out, the approach can be via the anteromedial (AM) portal or through the tibial bone tunnel. It has been suggested that better results might be expected by doing it anteromedially. Clinical results after femoral tunnel drilling via the AM or transtibial (TT) techniques in reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) are presented. Three hundred patients with ACL injuries were chosen for this study from previously collected data on ACL reconstructions. They were divided into two groups: 150 patients treated with AM drilling and 150 treated with TT drilling. In the AM group, the reconstructions were performed using a semitendinosus graft with the Tape Locking Screw (TLS?) technique (n?=?87) or Retrobutton? femoral and BioScrew? tibial fixation with a semitendinosus-gracilis graft (n?=?63). In the TT group, the fixation method used was Rigidfix? femoral and Intrafix tibial fixation with a semitendinosus-gracilis graft. The evaluation methods were clinical examination, knee scores (Lysholm, Tegner and IKDC) and instrumented laxity measurements (KT-2000?). Our aim was to evaluate if there was better rotational stability and therefore better clinical results when using AM drilling compared to TT drilling. After excluding revision ACL reconstructions, there were 132 patients in the AM group and 133 in the TT group for evaluation. At the 2-year follow-up, there were 60 patients in the AM group (45.5%) and 58 in the TT group (43.6%). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in any of the evaluation methods used. Both drilling techniques resulted in improved patient performance and satisfaction. We found no data supporting the hypothesis that the AM drilling technique provides better rotational stability to the knee. ISRCTN registry with study ID ISRCTN16407730. Retrospectively registered Jan 9th 2020.
机译:ACL重建中的股骨隧道可以从内部或从内部外部构成。在进行内部时,该方法可以通过主导(AM)门户或通过胫骨骨隧道。有人建议,通过向主动执行它,可能会期望更好的结果。通过AM或TT)钻探在重建前十字条纹韧带(ACL)的股骨隧道钻孔后临床结果。从预先收集的ACL重建数据中选择了本研究的三百患者。它们分为两组:150名患者治疗AM钻孔,150例用TT钻孔处理。在AM组中,使用具有胶带锁定螺钉(TLSα)技术(n?= 107)或retrobutton的组织植物接枝进行重建股骨和生物螺钉?用半鉴定胫骨胫骨移植物(n?=Δ63)。在TT组中,所使用的固定方法是刚性特写?股骨和胫骨内胫骨固定与半鉴定胰蛋白酶 - Gracilis移植物。评估方法是临床检查,膝关节分数(Lysholm,Tegner和IKDC)和仪表释放测量(KT-2000?)。我们的目的是评估是否有更好的旋转稳定性,因此使用AM钻井时更好的临床结果。在排除ACL重建后,AM组中有132名患者,TT组中有133名患者进行评估。在2年的随访中,AM组中有60名患者(45.5%)和TT组58例(43.6%)。在使用的任何评估方法中,组之间没有统计学上显着的差异。钻孔技术均导致患者的性能和满意度提高。我们发现没有数据支持AM钻孔技术为膝盖提供更好的旋转稳定性的数据。 ISRCTN注册表与研究ID ISRCTN16407730。回顾性地注册了2020年1月9日。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号