...
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 >Femoral tunnel position on conventional magnetic resonance imaging after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in young men: Transtibial technique versus anteromedial portal technique
【24h】

Femoral tunnel position on conventional magnetic resonance imaging after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in young men: Transtibial technique versus anteromedial portal technique

机译:传统磁股骨隧道位置磁共振成像在前交叉韧带重建的年轻人:Transtibial入技术和门户技术

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes after single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with a free Achilles tendon allograft using either a transtibial or an anteromedial portal technique and then to quantify the difference in femoral tunnel position between these 2 approaches. This assessment was to be performed with a new method using conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with a digital imaging system. Methods: In this prospective randomized comparative study, 53 young male patients with ACL rupture underwent ACL reconstruction with the transtibial technique (group 1) or the anteromedial portal technique (group 2). We assessed clinical outcomes with the Lachman test, pivot shift test, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) classification, Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, and single leg hop (SLH) test. Radiologic assessments included the position of the femoral tunnel aperture and the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) index on conventional MRI and the side-to-side difference (SSD) on stress radiographs. Results: Sixty-one participants had follow-up. The mean follow-up period was 30.2 months. At the last follow-up, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in results from the Lachman test, pivot shift test, IKDC classification, Tegner activity scale, and SLH test. The Lysholm score and SSD results in group 2 were superior to those in group 1 (P <.001). The femoral tunnel aperture was positioned more posteriorly in group 2 than in group 1 (P <.001). Changes in the PCL index were greater in group 1 than in group 2 (P <.001). Conclusions: The position of the femoral tunnel aperture created with the anteromedial portal technique was more posterior than that made with the transtibial technique. Knees reconstructed with the anteromedial portal technique were more stable in Telos testing, and were 3 points higher on the Lysholm score. However, there were no statistically significant differences in the Tegner activity scale or IKDC classification between the 2 groups. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic level I, randomized controlled clinical trial.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是比较单包前后临床结果交叉韧带(ACL)重建的使用一个免费的跟腱同种异体移植物入transtibial或门户技术然后在股量化的区别隧道位置这两个方法之间。是用一种新方法进行评估使用传统的磁共振成像与数字成像系统(MRI)。这种前瞻性随机对比研究,53岁年轻男性患者ACL断裂了与transtibial ACL重建技术(组1)或双侧门户技术(组2)。我们评估临床结果拉克测试,测试主转变,国际膝盖文档委员会(IKDC)分类、Lysholm得分,Tegner活动规模,和单腿跳(SLH)测试。评估包括股的位置隧道孔径和韧带韧带(PCL)指数在常规MRI和左右的区别(SSD)的压力射线照片。随访。个月。两组之间的显著差异从拉测试结果,测试主转变,IKDC分类、Tegner活动规模,SLH测试。组2高于1组(P<措施)。定位比在后方2组组1 (P <措施)。在组1比2组(P <措施)。结论:股骨隧道的位置孔径与双侧门户创建技术是比这更后用transtibial技术。与双侧门户技术稳定的终极测试中,高出3分在Lysholm得分。在统计上有显著差异Tegner活动规模或IKDC分类在两组之间。我治疗水平,随机对照临床试验。

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