...
首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Sports Medicine >Comparison between single-and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized, single-blinded clinical trial.
【24h】

Comparison between single-and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized, single-blinded clinical trial.

机译:单束和双束前交叉韧带重建的比较:一项前瞻性,随机,单盲临床试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Double-bundle ACL reconstruction popularity is increasing with the aim to reproduce native ACL anatomy and improve ACL reconstruction outcome. However, to date, only a few randomized clinical studies have been published. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to prospectively compare the clinical results of single- and double-bundle ACL reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: Seventy patients with a chronic unilateral ACL rupture who underwent arthroscopically assisted ACL reconstruction using a hamstring graft were randomized to receive a single- (SB) or double-bundle (DB) reconstruction. Both groups were comparable with regard to preoperative data. A double-incision surgical technique was adopted in both groups. The graft was fixed by looping the hamstring tendons around a bony (DB) or a metallic (SB) bridge on the tibial side and with interference screws reinforced with a staple on the femur. The same rehabilitation protocol was adopted. Outcome assessment was performed by a blinded, independent observer using the visual analog scale (VAS) score, the new International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and KT-1000 arthrometer evaluation. RESULTS: All the patients reached a minimum follow-up of 2 years. No differences between the 2 groups were observed in terms of KOOS and IKDC subjective score. A statistically significant difference in favor of the DB group was found with the VAS (P < .03). The objective IKDC final scores showed statistically significantly more "normal knees" in the DB group than in the SB group (P = .03). There was 1 stability failure in the DB group and 3 in the SB group. The KT-1000 arthrometer data showed a statistically significant decrease in the average anterior tibial translation in the DB group (1.2 mm DB vs 2.1 mm SB; P < .03). The incidence of a residual pivot-shift glide was 14% in DB and 26% in SB (P = .08). CONCLUSION: In the 2-year minimum follow-up, DB ACL reconstructions showed better VAS, anterior knee laxity, and final objective IKDC scores than SB. However, longer follow-up and accurate instrumented in vivo rotational stability assessment are needed.
机译:背景:双束ACL重建的普及性正在不断增长,目的是复制天然ACL解剖结构并改善ACL重建结果。然而,迄今为止,仅发表了一些随机临床研究。目的:本研究的目的是前瞻性比较单束和双束ACL重建的临床结果。研究设计:随机对照临床试验;证据等级:1。方法:将70例慢性慢性单侧ACL破裂患者接受使用a绳肌腱移植的关节镜辅助ACL重建,随机接受单(SB)或双束(DB)重建。两组在术前数据方面具有可比性。两组均采用双切口手术技术。通过将绳肌腱绕在胫骨侧的骨(DB)或金属(SB)桥上并在股骨上用钉钉加固的干涉螺钉来固定移植物。采用了相同的康复方案。结果评估由盲人独立观察员使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分,新的国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)表格,膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结果评分(KOOS)以及KT-1000关节强度计评估进行。结果:所有患者均获得了至少2年的随访。两组的KOOS和IKDC主观评分均无差异。在VAS上发现有利于DB组的统计学差异显着(P <.03)。在统计学上,DB组的客观IKDC最终得分显示出“正常膝盖”明显多于SB组(P = .03)。 DB组有1个稳定性失败,SB组有3个。 KT-1000关节流量计的数据显示,DB组胫骨平均前移量有统计学意义的降低(1.2 mm DB vs 2.1 mm SB; P <.03)。残留的枢轴-滑行滑行发生率在DB中为14%,在SB中为26%(P = .08)。结论:在最少两年的随访中,DB ACL重建术显示出比SB更好的VAS,前膝松弛和最终客观IKDC评分。但是,需要更长的随访时间和准确的体内旋转稳定性评估仪器。

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