...
首页> 外文期刊>Arthroscopy: the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association >How Accurate Are Anatomic Landmarks for Femoral Tunnel Positioning in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction? An In Vivo Imaging Analysis Comparing Both Anteromedial Portal and Outside-In Techniques
【24h】

How Accurate Are Anatomic Landmarks for Femoral Tunnel Positioning in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction? An In Vivo Imaging Analysis Comparing Both Anteromedial Portal and Outside-In Techniques

机译:如何准确的解剖标志股吗隧道定位在前交叉韧带重建?比较入门户和由外向内技术

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: To assess the ability of 2 independent surgical techniques, an inside-out technique and an outside-in technique, using bony landmarks on the femoral wall, to place the anterior cruciate ligament graft anatomically. Methods: Aretrospective single-center study was conducted in 2012 and included patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Two techniques were used: The lateral condylar wall was visualized from the anterolateral portal and tunnels were drilled "outside-in" in one group, whereas viewing was performed from the anteromedial portal and retrograde drilling ("inside-out") was performed in the other group. The primary outcome measure was the placement of the tunnel center point on postoperative computed tomography scans with 3-dimensional reconstruction, according to the radiographic quadrant method of Bernard and Hertel. The measurements were compared with optimal placements according to Bird et al. Their reliability was assessed with Spearman (rho) and intraclass correlation coefficients. Results: Forty patients were included, with 20 in each group; the meanage was 29.8 +/- 9.6 years, and there were 33 men and 7 women. The interobserver reliability and intraobserver reliability of measurements were good, with a Spearman rho between 0.46 (P = .002) and 0.93 (P < .001) and an intraclass correlation coefficient between 0.44 (P = .001) and 0.86 (P < .001). The femoral tunnel positions of both techniques were close to the previously published anatomic placements, but there was a significant difference between our results and the theoretical position in proximal-distal measurements (P = .01). There was no difference in the anteroposterior measurements. There was no statistical difference in the accuracy of placement of the femoral tunnel center point between these 2 independent techniques. Conclusions: The direct arthroscopic visualization of bony landmarks seems sufficient for accurate positioning of the femoral tunnel whatever the drilling technique. This finding is clinically relevant because the routine use of direct measurement techniques or intraoperative radiographs may not be necessary to obtain anatomic tunnel placement.
机译:目的:评估2个独立的能力由内而外技术和外科技术一个由外向内的方法,使用骨地标股墙,将前交叉韧带移植解剖学上。Aretrospective单中心研究2012年,包括病人前交叉韧带重建。技术被使用:外侧髁的墙可视化的前外侧的门户和隧道钻在一组“由外向内”,而从执行查看入门户和逆行钻探(“由内向外”)在另一组执行。主要结果测量的位置隧道在术后计算中心点断层扫描和三维重建,根据射线照相伯纳德和赫特尔象限的方法。测量与优化位置根据鸟等。可靠性与斯皮尔曼(ρ)和评估组内相关系数。包括四十个病人,每个20集团;有33个男人和7个女人。可靠性和intraobserver可靠性测量好,斯皮尔曼ρ0.46 (P = .002)和0.93之间(P <措施)一个组内相关系数之间0.44 (P =措施)和0.86 (P <措施)。隧道技术都是接近的位置先前发表的解剖位置,但是我们有一个重要的区别结果和理论地位proximal-distal测量(P = . 01)。没有前后的差异测量。股的位置的准确性隧道这两个独立之间的中心点技术。可视化的骨性标志似乎足够了股骨隧道的精确定位无论钻井技术。临床相关,因为常规使用或术中直接测量技术射线照片可能不是必要的获得解剖隧道位置。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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