单束与双束异体肌腱重建前交叉韧带

[目的]比较同种异体单束八股腘绳肌腱与四股双束腘绳肌腱重建前交叉韧带的临床效果。[方法]2010年~2011年对64例前交叉韧带断裂患者采用同种异体腘绳肌腱行重建术,其中33例采用单束八股移植物技术(单束组),31例采取双束四股移植腱技术(双束组)。应用KT1000关节测量仪、Lachman试验、轴移试验评估关节稳定性,按IKDC膝关节功能评分表、Lysholm评分表评估关节功能。[结果]术后5年单束组有2例(6.06%)失败,双束组有1例(3.23%)失败,两组差异无统计学意义(P=0.524)。单束组KT1000测量值为(1.41±1.21)mm,双束组为(1.40±1.12)mm,差异无统计学意义(P=0.804)。Lachman、轴移试验两组均获得良好的临床效果,两组间差异无统计学意义。两组的IKDC评分分别为分别为(91.12±4.12)分和(91.83±4.64)分,差异无统计学意义(P=0.571)。Lysholm评分分别为(92.03±4.32)分和(91.81±4.91)分,差异无统计学意义(P=0.214)。[结论]经过5年的随访,异体双束四股腘绳分别为肌腱与单束八股腘绳肌腱在术后成功率、稳定性以及关节功能方面表现都很优异,差异无统计学意义。     

后十字韧带合并后外侧韧带结构损伤的关节镜下重建

目的 介绍后十字韧带合并后外侧韧带结构损伤的关节镜下重建及加强方式,总结其初期临床结果.方法 2006年11月至2007年10月,20例陈旧性后十字韧带合并后外侧韧带结构损伤患者采用八股自体胭绳肌肌腱双束重建后十字韧带、自体半腱肌肌腱加强后外侧韧带结构的手术方法.移植物采用微型钢板纽扣进行悬吊式固定.根据IKDC、Lyshohn和Tegner评分标准进行膝关节功能评估.结果 术后随访1～2年,平均(15.5±3.3)个月.末次随访时,患者伸膝活动均正常,1例屈膝受限15°,5例屈膝受限5°.后抽屉试验阴性17例,Ⅰ度阳性2例,Ⅱ度阳性1例.KT-1000检查(屈膝90°,30 kg)双侧松弛度差异平均为(2.35±1.35)mm.18例(90%)屈膝30°位外侧膝关节间隙增宽小于5 mm,2例(10%)分别为5 mm和6 nun.屈膝30°位小腿外旋角度较健侧增加均小于5°,平均为2.10°±2.67°.IKDC、Lysholm和Tegner评分分别为(90.00±3.49)分、(91.90±2.57)分和(6.50±0.69)分,与术前差异均有统计学意义.IKDC膝关节韧带评级15例(75%)正常,4例(20%)接近正常,1例(5%)异常.结论 采用八股自体胴绳肌肌腱双束重建后十字韧带,同时用自体半腱肌肌腱加强后外侧韧带结构能够恢复后十字韧带和后外侧韧带结构损伤后的膝关节稳定性.     

LARS韧带与自体腘绳肌腱重建前交叉韧带的中期疗效比较

目的比较韧带先进加强系统(ligament advanced reinforcement system,LARS)人工韧带与自体腘绳肌腱作为移植物重建前交叉韧带的中期临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2014年1月至2017年1月行关节镜下LARS人工韧带或自体腘绳肌腱重建前交叉韧带患者的临床及随访资料,比较两组的临床疗效。LARS人工韧带组25例(人工韧带组),自体腘绳肌腱组35例(自体肌腱组)。术前与术后随访采用Lysholm、Tegner、国际膝关节评分委员会(international knee documentation committee,IKDC)评分评价临床疗效,采用前抽屉试验(ADT试验)、Lachman试验评价术后膝关节稳定性。结果术后随访24～54个月,平均36个月。两组组内末次随访与术前比较,Lysholm、Tegner、IKDC评分升高,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05);术前两组间Lysholm、Tegner、IKDC评分比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),术后末次随访人工韧带组与自体肌腱组在Lysholm评分、Tegner评分、IKDC评分、ADT试验及Lachman试验比较,差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。人工韧带组术后重返运动时间(19.52±2.33)周,明显早于自体肌腱组(29.54±2.33)周,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论关节镜下LARS韧带与自体腘绳肌腱重建前交叉韧带中期疗效相当,均可恢复膝关节功能与稳定性,但使用LARS韧带重建的患者能够早期重返运动。     

关节镜下采用四股和八股腘绳肌肌腱双束重建前十字韧带的比较研究

目的比较关节镜下采用四股和八股腘绳肌肌腱双束重建前十字韧带的临床效果。方法2001年9月至2002年8月,将76例陈旧性前十字韧带损伤患者随机分为两组进行双束重建。一组采用四股腘绳肌肌腱移植物:取同侧半腱肌肌腱,做成两个两股肌腱移植物,分别重建前十字韧带前、后束;一组采用八股腘绳肌肌腱移植物:取同侧半腱肌肌腱做成一个四股肌腱移植物重建前束,取同侧股薄肌肌腱做成另一个四股肌腱移植物重建后束。按照IKDC、Lysholm和Tegner膝关节评分标准评价疗效。结果四股肌腱移植物组有33例、八股肌腱移植物组有35例获得随访,随访时间1～3年,平均16个月。四股肌腱移植物组KT-1000检查示,双侧膝关节前向松弛度差异<3mm者25例(75.8%,25/33),3～5mm者5例(15.2%,5/33),6～10mm者3例(9.1%,3/33);轴移试验阴性28例(84.8%),阳性5例(15.2%)。八股肌腱移植物组KT-1000检查示,双侧膝关节前向松弛度差异<3mm者33例(94.3%,33/35),3～5mm者2例(5.7%,2/35);轴移试验阴性34例(97.1%),阳性1例(2.9%)。根据IKDC检查标准,四股肌腱移植物组有29例(87.9%,29/33)、八股肌腱移植物组有34例(97.1%,34/35)为正常或者接近正常,Lysholm评分分别为(90.2±2.9)分和(97.3±1.7)分,两组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论关节镜下采用八股腘绳肌肌腱较采用四股腘绳肌肌腱双束重建前十字韧带能够明显提高膝关节稳定性。     

关节镜下髌韧带和六股异体腘绳肌腱单束重建前交叉韧带的临床研究

目的 比较关节镜下采用髌韧带和六股异体腘绳肌腱单束重建前交叉韧带的临床效果.方法 回顾性分析2006年10月至2009年12月我科采用关节镜下异体移植物单束重建前交叉韧带(ACL)的108例患者的临床资料,其中六股异体腘绳肌腱58例(腘绳肌腱组),异体髌韧带50例(髌韧带组).术后应用Lachman和pivot-shift试验以及KT-1000评估膝关节稳定性,按照国际膝关节评分委员会(IKDC)、Lysholm膝关节评分评价膝关节功能.结果 术后患者随访时间12～38个月,平均为28.6个月.腘绳肌腱组KT-1000检查示双侧膝关节前向松弛度差异为(1.2±1.2)mm,显著小于髌韧带组(1.8±1.5)mm,差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.05).腘绳肌腱组轴移试验阴性55例(94.8%),阳性3例(5.2%),髌韧带组阴性41例(82.0%),阳性9例(18.0%),差异具有统计学意义(P＜0.05).术后腘绳肌腱组和髌韧带组IKDC评分为(90±5)分和(89±5)分,Lysholm评分为(94±5)分和(93±6)分,两组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 关节镜下单束重建前交叉韧带采用六股异体腘绳肌腱较髌韧带能够明显提高膝关节稳定性.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the outcome of arthroscopic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament(ACL)reconstruction with six-strand hamstring tendon and patellar tendon allograft.Methods From October 2006 to December 2009,108 patients with arthroscopic single-bundle ACL reconstruction were retrospectively reviewed,with 58 patients with six-strand hamstring tendon(Group H),and 50 patients with patellar tendon allograft(Group P).Patients were available for clinical evaluation with KT-1000 arthrometer measurements,Lachman and pivot-shift test,and knee function with the Internationa]Knee Documentation Committee(IKDC),Lysholm scores.Results All the patients were followed up at an average of 28.6 months(range 12-38 months).The average side-to-side difference was lesser for group H(1.2 ± 1.2)mm than group P(1.8 ±1.5)mm(P＜0.05).On the pivot-shift test,55(94.8%)patients were negative and 3(5.2%)were positive in group H,whereas 41(82.0%)were negative and 9(18.0%)were positive in group P,with significant difference between two groups(P＜0.05).All knee function scores were improved postoperatively,without statistically significant difference between the two groups(P＞0.05).Conclusion Arthroscopic single-bundle ACL reconstruction with six-strand hamstring tendon will achieve better knee stability than patellar tendon allograft.     

关节镜下4束自体腘绳肌腱与异体胫前肌腱移植重建前交叉韧带的临床对比研究

目的探讨4束自体腘绳肌腱与异体胫前肌腱移植重建前交叉韧带(ACL)的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2010年9月至2013年6月在广州市番禺中心医院行关节镜下ACL重建术的42例单纯ACL断裂患者的临床资料,根据移植物的不同分为自体组(4束自体腘绳肌腱移植,22例)和异体组(异体胫前肌腱移植,20例),比较两组手术时间、发热时间和伤口愈合时间的差异;采用Lysholm膝关节评分、国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)膝关节功能主观评分表评估膝关节功能,KT-2000关节测量仪评估膝关节稳定性。结果自体组手术时间长于异体组,发热时间少于异体组,两组比较,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。自体组和异体组随访时间分别为(27±3)和(27±4)个月。随访期间两组均无移植物断裂松动、下肢深静脉栓塞、伤口不愈合等并发症发生。末次随访时,两组Lysholm评分、IKDC分级、KT2000平移距离均较术前明显改善(P0.05),但两组之间上述指标比较,差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 4束自体腘绳肌腱与异体胫前肌腱重建ACL的临床疗效无明显差异;在缺乏自体韧带情况下,异体胫前肌腱是良好的替代物之一。     

三明治式后十字韧带重建的临床疗效

目的 评估后十字韧带三明治式重建,即保留残存纤维,采用八股腘绳肌腱双束重建后十字韧带的效果.方法 2005年1月至2005年6月,单纯陈旧性后十字韧带损伤患者18例,男14例,女4例;年龄19～42岁,平均34岁.在关节镜下采用自体腘绳肌腱行双束四隧道重建,其中采用四股半腱肌腱重建前外侧束,四股股薄肌腱重建后内侧束.残存纤维保留于重建的双柬移植物之间.通过微型钢板和纽扣悬吊式固定移植物.根据IKDC、Lysholm和Tegner评分标准进行评估.结果 患者均获得2年以上随访,末次随访时发现,17例患者(94.4%)后抽屉试验阴性,1例后抽屉试验1度阳性.KT-1000检查示,双膝后向松弛度差值从术前的(9.3±1.4)mm改善为术后的(0.7±0.9)mm,两者比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.01).根据IKDC评估标准,16例患者(88.9%)评级正常,2例患者(11.1%)评级接近正常.IKDC主观评分从(64.1±3.3)分增加到(95.6+3.1)分(P＜0.01).Lysholm评分从(58.6+4.4)分增加到(94.9±3.6)分(R＜0.01).Tegner评分,术前为5.6分,末次随访时为6.9分.结论 关节镜下后十字韧带三明治式重建能使88.9%的患者在术后2年得到正常的IKDC评级,11.1%的患者得到接近正常的IKDC评级.     

关节镜下自体腘绳肌腱重建前交叉韧带单束损伤

目的探讨保留剩余纤维束应用自体腘绳肌腱重建前交叉韧带(anterior cruciate ligament,ACL)单束损伤的疗效。方法 2005年3月-2009年5月,采用保留剩余纤维束、自体腘绳肌腱重建ACL单束损伤20例。男15例,女5例;年龄16～43岁,平均25.5岁。均为运动损伤。左膝12例,右膝8例。其中前内侧束断裂11例,后外侧束断裂9例。10例前抽屉试验阳性,8例Lachman试验阳性,2例两项试验均为阳性。Lysholm评分为(67.0±6.2)分,国际膝关节评分委员会评分(IKDC)为(69.0±7.5)分。受伤至手术时间1周～12个月,平均2.8个月。结果术后切口均Ⅰ期愈合。20例均获随访,随访时间12～36个月,平均18.5个月。末次随访时,膝关节活动度均达130°。17例前抽屉试验及Lachman试验阴性;2例前抽屉试验弱阳性,Lachman试验阴性;1例Lachman试验弱阳性,前抽屉试验阴性。末次随访时,Lysholm评分为(91.0±3.7)分,IKDC评分为(92.0±4.9)分,与术前比较差异均有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论保留剩余纤维束支自体腘绳肌腱重建ACL单束损伤,部分保留了膝关节本体感觉,有利于维持膝关节稳定性。     

关节镜下LARS韧带与自体腘绳肌腱重建前交叉韧带的早期临床疗效比较

目的回顾性研究LARS韧带和自体腘绳肌腱重建前交叉韧带(ACL)的早期临床疗效。方法自2008年7月～2011年2月对54例ACL损伤分别行关节镜下LARS韧带和自体腘绳肌腱重建ACL,腘绳肌腱组31例,LARS韧带组23例,分别对其术前术后行Lysholm、Tegner、IKDC评分,并选取最近一次随访结果进行统计分析。结果术后LARS韧带组的膝关节Lysholm、Tegner、IKDC评分略高于腘绳肌腱组,但两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 LARS韧带和自体腘绳肌腱重建ACL能明显改善患者的功能,LARS韧带组和自体韧带组有相似的早期疗效,且恢复时间明显缩短。     

关节镜下自体和同种异体肌腱重建前交叉韧带的疗效比较

[目的]探讨关节镜下自体和同种异体肌腱重建前交叉韧带的疗效。[方法]将本院2013年1月~2014年12月收治的86例陈旧性前交叉韧带损伤重建患者随机分为2组,每组43例。自体肌腱组行自体腘绳肌腱重建,异体肌腱组行同种异体肌腱重建。术后,对两组患者重建后免疫排斥反应、膝关节功能(Lysholm、Tegner、IKDC)、胫骨前移程度(KT 2 000、Lachman)、关节运动肌力进行评价。[结果]异体肌腱组重建后免疫排斥反应[疼痛>1周(32.6%)、关节积液穿刺抽液(55.8%)、白细胞计数>10×10~9L~(-1)(53.5%)]大于自体肌腱组(27.9%、51.2%、46.5%),但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后两组Lysholm、Tegner、IKDC评分显著升高(P<0.05),但两组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后两组KT 2 000评分显著降低(P<0.05),但两组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);术后两组Lachman评价差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。异体肌腱组术后膝关节肌肉峰力矩(屈膝、伸膝、内旋、外旋)无显著变化(P>0.05);自体肌腱组术后膝关节肌肉峰力矩(屈膝、内旋)显著降低(P<0.05),且低于异体肌腱组(P<0.05)。[结论]关节镜下自体和同种异体肌腱重建前交叉韧带的临床疗效相当,可依据患者情况合理选择。     

Fibular Collateral Ligament Reconstruction Graft Options: Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Autograft Versus Allograft

PurposeTo compare varus knee stability and clinical outcomes between patients who underwent fibular collateral ligament reconstruction (FCLR) or lateral collateral ligament (LCL) reconstruction with autografts versus allografts when undergoing concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).MethodsAll patients who underwent primary ACLR and concomitant FCLR from 2010 to 2017 performed by a single surgeon (R.F.L.) were retrospectively identified. Clinical characteristics and graft choices for FCLR were collected. Patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up for clinical outcome scores and 6-month stress radiographs were included. Patients with any other ligamentous procedure or revision ACLR were excluded.ResultsWe identified 69 primary ACLR with concomitant FCLR patients who met the inclusion criteria. Fifty patients underwent FCLR with semitendinosus autografts, and 19 with allografts. There were no significant side-to-side differences (SSDs) in lateral compartment gapping on varus stress x-rays between the 2 cohorts (allograft, 0.49 mm; autograft, 0.15 mm, P = .22), and no FCLR failures. There were no significant differences between autograft and allograft groups at minimum 2-year outcomes for 12-Item Short Form mental or physical composite score (SF12 MCS, P = .134; SF12 PCS, P = .642), WOMAC total (P = .158), pain (P = .116), stiffness (P = .061), or activity (P = .252); International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) (P = .337), Tegner (P = .601), Lysholm (P = .622), or patient satisfaction (P = .218). There were no significant differences in clinical knee stability between groups at an average follow-up of 3.6 years (P = 1.0).ConclusionThere were no differences in varus stress laxity 6 months postoperatively or clinical outcome scores at ≥2 years postoperatively between patients having FCL reconstructions with either autograft or allograft. This study demonstrates that both hamstring autografts and allografts for FCL reconstructions offer reliable and similar radiographic and clinical results at short-term follow-up.Level of EvidenceIII, retrospective comparative trial.     

自体和异体骨-髌腱骨移植物重建膝前十字韧带的比较研究

目的 比较异体和自体骨-髌腱-骨(B-Pt-B)移植物重建膝关节前十字韧带(ACL)的临床效果.方法 27例ACL断裂患者接受关节镜下异体B-PT-B重建ACL手术,男18例,女9例;年龄16~49岁,平均25.5岁.同期25例ACL断裂患者接受关节镜下自体B-PT-B重建ACL手术,男19例,女6例;18～43岁,平均26.7岁.两组患者均采用相同的手术方法 .检测术后住院期间体温、红细胞沉降率、C反应蛋白,采用IKDC、Lysholm、Tegner评分、KT-2000及Biodex等速肌力测试系统评估手术效果及肌力恢复情况.结果 两组患者术后发热天数、红细胞沉降率、C反应蛋白比较,差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).异体组随访时间为30～48个月,平均37.1个月;自体组随访时间为30～54个月,平均36.3个月.随访时两组的IKDC、Lysholm、Tegner评分及膝前痛比例比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05),异体组分别为89.5(74～100)分、93.o(70～100)分、8.0(5～10)分、44.4%,自体组分别为86.5(54～100)分、94.6(82～100)分、7.7(6～10)分、72.O%.两组30.和90.胫骨前移距离比较,差异无统计学意义,异体组分别为(1.72±1.73)mm、(1.37±1.90)mm,自体组分别为(1.16±.32)mm、(-0.08±1.62)mm.两组患者Biodex等速肌力在60°/s时分别恢复至健侧的82.7%和86.6%,在120°/s时分别恢复至健侧的82.8%和85.3%.结论 异体与自体B-PT-B重建ACL术后疗效无明显差异.     

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Allograft versus autograft

Purpose: This study was performed to compare the minimal 2-year outcome of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) allografts versus autografts, both augmented with an iliotibial band tenodesis. Type of Study: Retrospective review. Methods: Forty-six of 52 BPTB ACL reconstructions using allografts and 33 of 37 BPTB ACL reconstructions using autografts were followed up at a mean of 2.75 and 3.36 years, respectively. All patients had an iliotibial band tenodesis. Evaluations included the Lysholm II scale, a questionnaire, physical examination findings, and KT-1000 arthrometry. Results: No statistically significant differences were seen between groups in Lysholm II scores or in any subjective category. Most patients (91% allograft; 97% autograft) had good to excellent Lysholm II scores. Sixty-five percent of allograft patients and 73% of autograft patients returned to their preinjury activity level. More allograft patients complained of retropatellar pain (16% v 9% for autograft patients). Fifty-three percent of allograft patients versus 23% of autograft patients had a flexion deficit of 5° or more when compared with the normal contralateral side. When comparing KT-1000 side-to-side differences, we found no significant differences between groups. Ninety-one percent of both groups had maximum side-to-side differences less than 5 mm. Three allograft patients (6.5%) had traumatic ruptures at 12, 19, and 43 months postoperatively versus none in the autograft group. All three allograft patients who sustained postoperative traumatic ruptures had received fresh frozen, nonirradiated allografts. Conclusions: Results of ACL reconstruction using allografts or autografts augmented with an iliotibial band tenodesis were comparable. The BPTB autograft should remain the gold standard, although the BPTB allograft in ACL reconstruction is a reasonable alternative.Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery, Vol 19, No 5 (May-June), 2003: pp 453–462     

Small Size Autograft versus Large Size Allograft in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

BackgroundA small autograft diameter negatively affects functional outcomes, knee stability, and the risk of rerupture after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, whereas the strength of allograft decreases over time. Therefore, it is not clear whether the use of smaller autografts or the use of larger allografts in ACL yields better results. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of smaller autografts and larger allografts for ACL reconstruction.MethodsFifty-one patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autografts (size ≤ 8 mm) and 21 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with allografts (size ≥ 10 mm) were included in our study. All patients underwent the same aggressive early postoperative rehabilitation program. There were no significant differences between the autograft and allograft groups regarding the preoperative patient age, sex, time from injury to surgery, and average follow-up time.ResultsThe mean diameter of the 4-stranded hamstring tendon grafts used as autografts was 7.48 ± 0.33 mm and the mean diameter of the allografts was 10.76 ± 0.67 mm. According to specific tests for the ACL (anterior drawer, Lachman, and pivot shift) and clinical evaluation tests (Lysholm knee scoring scale and International Knee Documentation Committee questionnaire), the final follow-up results were significantly better than the preoperative status in both autograft and allograft ACL reconstruction groups. Therefore, there were no significant differences between the autograft and allograft groups preoperatively and at the final follow-up.ConclusionsThe large size of the graft in ACL reconstruction has been reported to affect results positively. However, in our study, we could not find any significant differences between the smaller size autografts and larger size allografts in terms of inadequacy, rerupture, and final follow-up functional results. Although allografts were significantly larger than autografts, we did not have the positive effect of larger size grafts. Smaller size autografts were as effective as the larger size allografts.     

Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament in females

Purpose: To compare the clinical results of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in female patients using quadruple-looped hamstring autograft versus patellar tendon autograft at minimum 2-year follow-up. Type of Study: Case series. Methods: A prospective clinical review was performed to compare the results of ACL reconstruction with hamstring versus patellar tendon autograft in a group of female patients. Exclusion criteria included chronic injuries (greater than 3 months), associated collateral ligament injuries, Workers’ Compensation or litigation cases, and bilateral anterior cruciate ligament injuries. There were 39 female patients in the hamstring group (average follow-up, 40.9 months) and 37 female patients in the patellar tendon group (average follow-up, 52 months). Both types of grafts were fixed with an EndoButton proximally and with sutures tied over a post or button distally. The postoperative rehabilitation regimen was identical for both groups. Objective parameters evaluated included preinjury and postoperative Tegner and Lysholm scores, side-to-side KT-1000 maximum-manual arthrometer differences, and clinical examination including Lachman and pivot-shift tests. Graft failure was defined by any one of the following: a KT-1000 difference of greater than 5 mm, a 2+ Lachman, a 1+ or greater pivot shift, or revision surgery. Results: The failure rate in the hamstring group was 23% versus 8% in the patellar tendon group, which was not statistically significant (P > .1). Comparison of preinjury Tegner activity scores to postoperative scores revealed that patients in the hamstring group did not return to their preinjury level of activity (preinjury 6.54 v postoperative 5.17) as well as patients in the patellar tendon group (preinjury 6.20 v postoperative 6.59). Patients in the hamstring group had a significant increase in pain compared with the patellar tendon group (P = .034). Conclusions: Although not statistically significant, the hamstring group had more failures, more laxity on clinical examination, and more patients with larger KT-1000 arthrometer differences. These results indicate a trend toward increased graft laxity in female patients undergoing reconstruction with hamstring autograft compared with patellar tendon when evaluated by a single surgeon using similar fixation techniques at short- to medium-range follow-up. More studies with larger patient numbers using current fixation techniques are necessary to confirm these findings.     

Revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon allograft and autograft: 2- and 5-year results

Introduction

The most common failure reasons of an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft are incorrect positioning of the drill channels and insufficient fixation. In many cases, one-stage revision with patellar tendon graft and the appropriate corrections are possible. For previous use of the ipsilateral patellar tendon third, an allograft seems favorable for reconstruction. So far, no study compared the results of revision surgery of autologous versus allogenous patellar tendon grafts for revision surgery of the ACL in a 5-year follow-up.

Materials and methods

A retrospective study was conducted to analyze the clinical outcome and stability results 2?years (19.2?±?5.8?months) and 5?years (68.8?±?6.8?months) after revision of ACL reconstruction using middle-third patellar tendon allografts and autografts. The allografts were cleansed by mechanical means only. There were 15 patients in the allograft group and 14 in the autograft group. Patients with isolated re-rupture of the ACL graft were included in the study. Clinical results were evaluated by International Knee Documentation Committee 2000 forms (IKDC), Lysholm score, Tegner activity score, and visual analog scale. Stability was evaluated by means of KT-1000 arthrometer, Lachman test, and pivot-shift test. Location of drill holes was evaluated radiologically. Gonarthritis was graded according to Kellgren and Lawrence on the basis of radiographs.

Results

There were no significant differences between the two groups in anterior translation, manual examination for stability, IKDC 2000 findings, Tegner activity score, or Lysholm score. Extension deficits were more frequent in the autograft group at the first follow-up (P?=?0.010). Lateral gonarthritis and femoral tunnel widening were more common in the allograft group at the second follow-up (P?=?0.049 and P?=?0.023, respectively). Pain on walking downhill was significantly more frequent in the allograft group at the second follow-up (P?=?0.027).

Conclusions

The functional results with allografts that had not undergone irradiation or chemical sterilization were comparable to those with autografts in ACL revision surgery. Allografts represent a good alternative to autogenous patellar tendons in revision surgery.     

Hamstring tendon autograft versus LARS artificial ligament for arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in a long-term follow-up

Introduction

Surgical reconstruction has been increasingly recommended for the surgical management of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) ruptures. While the choice of tissue graft still remains controversial. Currently both hamstring tendon autograft (HTG) and ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS) artificial ligament are widely used but there are seldom reports on the comparisons of their clinical results. Our study was aimed to assess the effectiveness of these two grafts.

Materials and methods

Thirty-five patients with unilateral PCL rupture were enrolled in this retrospectively study. Sixteen of them received arthroscopically assisted PCL reconstruction using hamstring tendon autografts (HTG group) and nineteen using LARS ligaments (LARS group). All cases were followed up for 46–57 months with a mean of 51 months. Follow-up examinations included radiographic assessment, Lysholm score, Tegner score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) rating scales and KT-1000 test.

Results

All patients improved significantly at the final follow-up compared with the examinational results preoperatively and there were no significant differences between HTG group and LARS group with respect to the results of radiographic assessment, Lysholm score, Tegner score, IKDC rating scales and KT-1000 test.

Conclusions

Similar good clinical results were obtained after PCL reconstruction using hamstring tendon autografts and LARS ligaments. Both LARS ligament and hamstring tendon autograft are ideal grafts for PCL reconstruction.     

自体与γ射线照射和非照射异体骨-髌腱-骨重建前十字韧带的比较研究

目的 比较自体与γ射线照射和非照射异体骨-髌腱-骨(bone patellar tendon bone,B-PT-B)重建膝关节前十字韧带(anterior cruciate ligament,ACL)的临床疗效.方法 107例ACL断裂患者随机分为三组:36例采用自体B-PT-B(自体组),36例采用深低温冷冻保存异体B-PT-B(异体组),35例采用γ射线照射深低温冷冻保存异体B-PT-B(γ射线组).由同一术者采用标准关节镜技术完成ACL重建.结果 自体组(36例)平均随访39.5个月、异体组(34例)36.3个月、γ射线组(33例)37.6个月.(1)自体组术中髌骨骨折1例、术后膝前痛2例,异体组出现迟发感染1例.自体组手术时间较异体组、γ射线组长,术后发热天数较异体组、γ射线组短.(2)自体组、异体组轴移试验、Lachman试验或前抽屉试验及KT-2000检测结果 的差异无统计学意义,与γ射线组比较差异均有统计学意义.γ射线组ACL重建失败率(36%)高于自体组(8%)、异体组(9%).三组Daniel单腿水平跳跃试验、IKDC评分及Lysholm-Tegner运动水平评分的差异无统计学意义.结论 深低温冷冻异体与自体B-PT-B重建ACL短期疗效接近.经γ射线照射后异体B-PT-B重建ACL的膝关节前后及旋转稳定性均降低.