首页> 外文OA文献 >Kinematics and laxity in the knee, before and after Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction. Evaluation using dynamic and static radiostereometric analysis
【2h】

Kinematics and laxity in the knee, before and after Anterior Cruciate Ligament reconstruction. Evaluation using dynamic and static radiostereometric analysis

机译:前交叉韧带重建前后膝关节的运动学和松弛。使用动态和静态放射性测量分析进行评估

摘要

Introduction: Whether full active and passive extension training, started immediately after an Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction, will increase the post-operative A-P laxity of the knee has been the subject of discussion. For many years, many protocols have included full extension with full weight bearing after an ACL reconstruction. This is, however, based on empirical facts and has not been studied well in randomised studies. The A-P laxity of the knee joint is an important parameter when evaluating ACL-injured knees. For instance, it is difficult to find a study dealing with ACL insufficiency or postoperative follow-up after an ACL reconstruction, which does not use the KT-1000 as an evaluation instrument to assess objective outcome. The question of whether the results of KT-1000 measurements are sufficiently accurate and the extent to which they are clinically relevant still remains. Previous studies have shown abnormal kinematics in knees with chronic ACL insufficiency and reconstruction of the ligament using bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) or hamstring autograft has not normalised the kinematics. The aim of Study I was to evaluate whether a post-operative rehabilitation protocol, including active and passive extension without any restrictions in extension immediately after an ACL reconstruction, would increase the post-operative A-P laxity. The aim of Study II was to compare the KT-1000 arthrometer with RSA, a highly accurate method, to measure A-P laxity in patients with ACL ruptures, before and after reconstruction. The aim of Studies III and IV was to evaluate whether early ACL reconstruction (8-10 weeks after injury) would protect the knee joint from developing increased external tibial rotation. Twentytwo consecutive patients (14 men, 8 women, median age: 24 years, range: 16-41) were included in Studies I-II and were randomly allocated to two groups in Study I. Twenty-six consecutive patients (18 men, 8 women; median age 26, range 18-43) were included in Studies III and IV. All the patients had a unilateral ACL rupture and no other ligament injuries or any other history of previous knee injuries. One experienced surgeon operated on all the patients, using the BPTB or hamstring autograft. We used RSA with skeletal (tantalum) markers to study A-P laxity and knee kinematics. Dynamic RSA was performed to evaluate the pattern of knee motion during active and weight-bearing knee extension. For A-P laxity, we used static RSA and the KT-1000. Clinical tests were conducted using the Lysholm score, Tegner activity level, IKDC, one-leg-hop test and ROM. The patients were evaluated pre-operatively and up to two years after the ACL reconstruction. Results: The KT-1000 recorded significantly smaller side-to-side differences than RSA, both before and after the reconstruction of the ACL using a BPTB autograft. There were no significant differences in A-P laxity between early and delayed extension training after ACL reconstruction, up to two years postoperatively. Neither ROM, Lysholm score, Tegner activity level, IKDC nor the one-leg-hop test differed. Before surgical repair of the ACL and at the two-year follow-up, there were no significant differences between the injured and intact knees in internal/external tibial rotation or abduction/adduction, when the ACL reconstruction was performed within 8-10 weeks from injury. Conclusion: Early active and passive extension training, immediately after an ACL reconstruction using BPTB autografts, did not increase post-operative knee laxity up to two years after the operation. The KT- 1000 recorded significantly smaller side-to-side differences than the RSA, both before and after the reconstruction of the ACL. Before surgical repair (8-10 weeks after injury) of the ACL, the knee kinematics remained similar on the injured and normal sides. Two years after the reconstruction, the kinematics of the operated knee still remained normal, after using either BPTB or hamstring autografts.
机译:简介:前交叉韧带(ACL)重建后立即开始的全面主动和被动伸展训练是否会增加膝关节术后A-P松弛。多年以来,许多协议都包括在ACL重建后进行完全扩展和完全承重。但是,这是基于经验事实,在随机研究中并未得到很好的研究。评估ACL受伤的膝盖时,膝关节的A-P松弛度是一个重要参数。例如,很难找到有关ACL重建后的ACL功能不全或术后随访的研究,该研究没有使用KT-1000作为评估客观结果的评估工具。 KT-1000测量结果是否足够准确以及它们在临床上的相关程度仍然存在问题。先前的研究表明,患有慢性ACL功能不全的膝关节运动学异常,并且使用tend骨腱骨(BPTB)或绳肌自体移植重建韧带并不能使运动学正常化。研究I的目的是评估ACL重建后立即进行的术后康复方案(包括主动和被动扩展而无扩展限制)是否会增加术后A-P松弛。研究II的目的是将KT-1000关节流量计与RSA(一种高度准确的方法)进行比较,以测量重建前后ACL破裂患者的A-P松弛度。研究III和IV的目的是评估早期ACL重建(受伤后8-10周)是否可以保护膝关节免受胫骨外旋转的增加影响。研究I-II中包括22例连续患者(14例男性,8例女性,中位年龄:24岁,范围:16-41岁),并随机分为研究I的两组。连续26例患者(18例男性,8例)妇女;中位年龄26岁,范围18-43)纳入研究III和IV。所有患者均发生单侧ACL破裂,无其他韧带损伤或其他任何先前膝关节损伤史。一位经验丰富的外科医生使用BPTB或绳肌自体移植术对所有患者进行手术。我们使用带有骨骼(钽)标记的RSA来研究A-P松弛和膝关节运动学。动态RSA用于评估主动和负重膝盖伸展过程中膝盖运动的方式。对于A-P松弛,我们使用了静态RSA和KT-1000。使用Lysholm评分,Tegner活动水平,IKDC,单腿跳测试和ROM进行临床测试。术前和ACL重建后两年内对患者进行评估。结果:在使用BPTB自体移植重建ACL之前和之后,KT-1000的左右差异均明显小于RSA。在ACL重建后至术后两年,早期和延迟伸展训练之间的A-P松弛没有显着差异。 ROM,Lysholm评分,Tegner活动水平,IKDC和单腿跳测试均无差异。在进行ACL的外科手术修复之前和两年的随访中,当从ACL重建术后8-10周内进行ACL重建时,受伤的膝盖和完整的膝盖之间的胫骨内部/外部胫骨旋转或外展/内收没有明显差异。受伤。结论:在使用BPTB自体移植重建ACL之后,立即进行主动和被动伸展训练,直到术后两年,都不会增加术后膝关节松弛。在重建ACL之前和之后,KT-1000记录的左右差异明显小于RSA。在进行ACL的手术修复之前(受伤后8-10周),受伤侧和正常侧的膝部运动学保持相似。重建两年后,使用BPTB或绳肌自体移植后,手术膝关节的运动学仍然保持正常。

著录项

  • 作者

    Isberg Jonas;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2008
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

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