首页> 外文OA文献 >No Difference between Percutaneous and Arthroscopic Techniques in Identifying the Calcaneal Insertion during Ankle Lateral Ligament Reconstruction: A Cadaveric Study
【2h】

No Difference between Percutaneous and Arthroscopic Techniques in Identifying the Calcaneal Insertion during Ankle Lateral Ligament Reconstruction: A Cadaveric Study

机译:经皮和关节镜技术鉴定踝关节侧韧带重建期间的钙膜插入的差异无差异:尸体研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background. Both percutaneous and arthroscopic techniques have been introduced in anatomic ankle lateral ligaments reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to compare these two techniques in identifying the calcaneal insertion of the calcaneofibular ligament (CFL). Methods. Fifteen fresh-frozen human ankle cadaver specimens were used in this study. Each specimen was tested in three stages. For stage 1, each specimen was evaluated under arthroscopy. After debridement was performed, the insertion of the CFL on the calcaneus was identified, and a 1.5mm Kirschner wire was drilled at the center of the insertion. For stage 2, a percutaneous technique was used to identify the center of the insertion of the CFL. A second 1.5 mm Kirschner wire was drilled through the skin marker. For stage 3, the ankle was dissected, the footprint of the CFL was identified under direct vision, and the distances between the center of the CFL insertion on the calcaneus and the two Kirschner wires were measured, respectively. Results. In the arthroscopic technique group, the mean distance from the Kirschner wire to the center of the CFL insertion in the calcaneus was 3.4 ± 1.3 mm. In the percutaneous technique group, the mean distance from the Kirschner wire to the center of the CFL insertion was 3.2 ± 1.4 mm. No significant difference was found between the two groups. Conclusion. No difference in identifying the calcaneal insertion of the CFL was found between the percutaneous and the arthroscopic ankle lateral ligaments reconstruction technique. Both techniques can be used during anatomic ligaments reconstruction in treatment of chronic ankle instability.
机译:背景。已经引入了经皮和关节镜技术既是在解剖踝侧侧韧带重建中都引入过的。本研究的目的是比较这两种技术鉴定旋转性韧带(CFL)的钙质插入。方法。本研究中使用了十五个新鲜冷冻的人脚踝尸体标本。每个样本在三个阶段测试。对于第1阶段,在关节镜检查下评估每个样品。进行清除后,鉴定了CFL对钙盘上的插入,并且在插入的中心钻出1.5mm kirschner线。对于阶段2,使用经皮技术来识别CFL的插入中心。通过皮肤标记钻出第二个1.5毫米Kirschner线。对于阶段3,解剖踝关节,在直接视觉下鉴定CFL的占地面积,并且分别在钙烷上插入CFL插入的中心和两个kirschner线之间的距离。结果。在关节镜技术组中,距离kirschner线到CFL插入中心的平均距离在钙烷中为3.4±1.3mm。在经皮技术组中,距离kirschner线到Cfl插入中心的平均距离为3.2±1.4mm。两组之间没有发现显着差异。结论。在经皮和关节镜踝侧韧带重建技术之间发现了鉴定CFL的显析插入的差异。两种技术可在解剖韧带重建期间使用治疗慢性踝关节不稳定。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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