关节镜下同种异体骨-髌腱-骨双束重建膝关节前交叉韧带的临床比较研究

目的探讨关节镜下同种异体骨-髌腱-骨（bone-patellar tendon-bone,BPTB）移植物双束重建膝关节前交叉韧带（anterior cruciate ligament,ACL）的中期临床效果。方法 2003年7月～2007年7月,61例ACL断裂患者接受关节镜下BPTB重建ACL手术,按术式和移植物分为3组：异体BPTB双束组（20例）,异体BPTB单束组（21例）,自体BPTB单束组（20例）。3组平均随访时间分别为（41.6±3.0）、（42.3±3.9）、（42.5±2.7）月。通过膝关节查体、IKDC2000主观评分、Lysholm评分、Tegner评分、膝前痛、常规KT-2000、后推KT-2000及Biodex等速肌力测试系统评估手术效果。结果 3组间的IKDC2000、Lysholm、Tegner评分、大腿围度差值、肌力和常规KT-2000等指标差异无显著性（P〉0.05）。异体双束组的Pivotshift阳性发生率（5%,1/20）是异体单束组的1/6（29%,6/21）,自体单束组的1/4（20%,4/20）。异体双束组的后推KT-200030°位前移度（中位数15磅0.5 mm,20磅0.5 mm,30磅0.9 mm）明显低于其他两组（P〈0.05）。异体双束组（15%,3/20）和异体单束组（10%,2/21）的膝前痛发生率明显低于自体单束组（75%,15/20）（χ2=24.201,P=0.000）。结论同种异体BPTB双束重建ACL能够更好地恢复膝关节整体前向及旋转稳定性,减少并发症,可以作为髁间窝较宽的患者ACL初次解剖重建的理想手术方法。     

关节镜下胭绳肌腱部分重建、单束重建和双束重建前交叉韧带的疗效比较

目的 研究使用腘绳肌腱进行关节镜下前交叉韧带（ACL）损伤后部分重建、单束重建和双束重建的疗效差异。方法 本研究共包括56例ACL重建病例，其中部分重建11例，单束重建25例，双束重建20例。所有患者术前及随访时均进行IKDC2000、Tegner和Lysholm评分以及常规KT-2000和后推KT-2000测量，并对结果进行统计学分析。结果 平均随访19．84±5．03个月（13～22个月）。对三组的IKDC、Lysholm和Tegner评分的配对t检验显示，术后的IKDC、Lysholm和Tegner评分比术前均有显著改善。后推法KT-2000测量显示，ACL双束重建可以比单束重建获得更好的膝关节稳定性，ACL部分重建组膝关节的稳定性优于单束重建和双束重建组。但常规KT-2000测量无法辨别三种术式之间膝关节稳定性的差异。结论 ACL双束重建可以比单束重建更好地重建膝关节的稳定性，ACL部分重建的临床效果优于单束重建和双束重建；后推KT-2000测量在ACL双束重建和部分重建的术后稳定性评估上可能具有重要的应用价值。     

关节镜下双束及单束单隧道重建膝前交叉韧带的疗效比较

【摘要】 目的 探讨关节镜下前交叉韧带(ACL)损伤后双束及单束单隧道重建的近期临床疗效差异。 方法 我科自2008年1月至2011年6月对38例ACL损伤患者进行关节镜下韧带重建,其中双束单隧道重建21例(A组),传统单束单隧道重建17例(B组)。所有患者术前及随访时均进行IKDC2000、Larson和Lysholm评分比较手术前后膝关节功能,并对结果进行统计学分析。 结果 38例患者(38个膝关节)获得随访,随访时间12~36个月,平均25个月。关节活动度均正常,A组手术前后的Lysholm评分,Larson评分及IKDC评分均有统计学差异,B组手术前后的3种评分同样有统计学差异;A、B两组比较,除了术后Larson评分双束组优于单束组(P<0.05)外,其余均无统计学意义。结论 关节镜下ACL胫骨端双束单隧道重建与传统单束重建,均能取得较为满意近期临床疗效,双束组可能优于单束组,但有待进一步证实。     

单隧道双束和单束ACL重建的生物力学比较研究

目的比较单隧道双束和单隧道单束ACL重建膝关节稳定性的差异。方法选用6侧人体膝关节标本,保留完整的关节囊及周围韧带,行单隧道双束和单束ACL重建,在MTS-858生物材料试验系统上测试膝关节在胫前加载(134N)和旋转加载(5N·m内旋胫骨)下屈曲0°、15°、30°、60°、90°位时的运动学反应。每个膝关节在4个不同条件下进行测试:ACL完整、ACL损伤、单隧道双束重建ACL以及单隧道单束重建ACL,其中单隧道双束及单束ACL均采用双股腘绳肌腱。结果 (1)胫前加载:双束组在屈曲30°、60°和90°位,单束组在屈曲90°位时关节前后稳定性获得良好恢复(P0.05);在屈曲60°位时双束组的胫前位移明显低于单束组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。(2)旋转加载:与ACL完整组相比较,双束组的胫骨内旋角度在屈曲0°、60°位时无明显变化(P0.05),屈曲90°位时明显减少(P0.05);单束组在屈曲0°时无明显变化(P0.05)。屈曲60°和90°位时双束组的胫骨内旋角度明显小于单束组,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论与单隧道单束ACL重建相比,单隧道双束ACL重建能够更好地恢复膝关节前后稳定性及旋转稳定性。     

单束重建与解剖双束重建治疗内侧副韧带Ⅲ级损伤的生物力学比较研究

目的比较单束重建与解剖双束重建治疗膝关节内侧副韧带(medial collateral ligament,MCL)Ⅲ级损伤后膝关节稳定性差异,为临床MCL损伤治疗提供生物力学参考。方法取自愿捐赠的成人新鲜膝关节标本9具,随机分为3组(n=3)。其中,正常MCL组仅行前交叉韧带(anterior cruciate ligament,ACL)离断并单束重建,保留完整MCL。单束重建组及双束重建组均离断ACL、MCL浅层(superficial MCL,sMCL)及后斜韧带(posterior oblique ligament,POL),制备MCLⅢ级损伤模型;ACL单束重建后,分别行sMCL单束重建、sMCL及POL解剖双束重建。采用生物材料动态力学试验机测量各组膝关节完全伸直位及屈曲不同角度时,胫骨前方移位距离(anterior tibial translation,ATT)、胫骨内旋角(internal rotation,IR)、胫骨外翻角(valgus rotation,VAL),以及内旋及外翻力矩作用下MCL及ACL受力情况。结果膝关节完全伸直位及屈曲15°、30°、45°、60°、90°位时,3组ATT差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。单束重建组膝关节完全伸直位及屈曲15°位时IR及VAL,以及屈曲30°位时VAL,均明显大于双束重建组及正常MCL组(P0.05);双束重建组与正常MCL组差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。膝关节完全伸直位及屈曲15°、30°位时,内旋、外翻力矩作用下,3组MCL及ACL受力差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论相比单束重建,解剖双束重建治疗MCLⅢ级损伤可以更好地恢复膝关节的外翻及旋转稳定性。     

单束和双束腘绳肌肌腱重建前交叉韧带的比较

前交叉韧带(ACL)分成前内束(AM)和后外束(PL),双束重建可模拟正常的ACL结构。该文前瞻性随机研究关节镜下腘绳肌腱双束和单束重建ACL,并比较不同屈曲角度下膝关节的稳定性和本体感觉。108例膝关节单侧不稳伴ACL断裂病人中行单束重     

关节镜下自体腘绳肌肌腱移植重建膝前交叉韧带的临床观察

目的探讨关节镜下自体腘绳肌肌腱移植重建膝前交叉韧带的临床疗效。方法自2006年12月-2010年1月,对215例膝关节前交叉韧带损伤患者采用关节镜下自体腘绳肌肌腱移植重建（包括单束和双束）。比较患者术前、术后Lysholm膝关节评分和膝关节稳定性改变。结果本组215例中210例获得随访,1例患者在术后6周出现膝关节内感染,予行关节镜下清理、抗感染等处理后治愈。术前和术后1个月、术后6个月、术后1年Lysholm膝关节评分分别比较差异均有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。术前215例患者物理检查均表现为膝关节不稳,术后所有患膝不稳定表现消失。结论关节镜下自体腘绳肌肌腱移植重建膝前交叉韧带疗效可靠,依据病人实际情况个性化合理选择单双束重建。     

关节镜下 Moriya法重建膝前交叉韧带

目的报告关节镜下应用Moriya(守屋)法重建膝前交叉韧带(ACL)的手术方法及临床疗效。方法切取股薄肌腱、远段髂胫束瓣,胫骨止点保留,以髂胫束瓣包裹股薄肌腱重建ACL。手术16例,男12例,女4例。术前Lachman试验、前抽屉试验皆为阳性,经关节镜证实ACL内、外侧束完全断裂。结果术后随访4～17个月,平均随访9个月。按照日本骨科学会(JOA)制定的膝关节韧带损伤疗效评定标准,≥90分10例;80～90分5例;≤80分1例,优良率为93.75%。结论该术式对膝关节伸屈肌腱无损伤,不残留术后膝前痛,取材方便,操作简单,为关节镜下重建ACL的优良方法。     

前交叉韧带解剖位单束重建与传统过顶位单束重建的疗效比较

目的比较解剖位单束重建(anatomical single-bundle,ASB)与传统过顶位单束重建(over-the-top single-bundle,OSB)前交叉韧带(anterior cruciate ligament,ACL)的临床疗效。方法回顾分析2008年1月-6月收治的64例单膝ACL损伤患者临床资料。其中28例采用ASB治疗(ASB组),36例采用OSB治疗(OSB组)。两组患者性别、年龄、病程、国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)评分、Lysholm评分及膝关节前方松弛度等一般资料比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),具有可比性。结果两组术后切口均Ⅰ期愈合,无感染及其他并发症发生。患者均获随访,随访时间20～24个月,平均21.5个月。末次随访时,两组IKDC评分、Lysholm评分及前方松弛度与术前比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组间比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。末次随访时,ASB组轴移试验阴性率与术前比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);OSB组与术前比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);两组间比较差异亦有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论关节镜下采用ASB重建ACL疗效优于传统OSB,尤其在控制旋转稳定性方面。     

关节镜下保留胫骨侧残端重建前交叉韧带的疗效

目的 观察关节镜下保留胫骨侧残端重建前交叉韧带(ACL)的疗效。方法 采用关节镜下保留胫骨侧残端重建ACL治疗58例ACL断裂患者。采用前抽屉试验、Lachman试验评价膝关节稳定性。采用Tegner运动分级评分、IKDC膝关节功能主观评分和Lysholm评分评价膝关节功能。结果 患者均获得24个月随访。术后3、6、12、24个月前抽屉试验及Lachman试验均为(-)。末次随访时，Tegner运动分级评分与术前比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);IKDC膝关节功能主观评分、Lysholm评分均较术前明显提高(P<0.05);患者膝关节活动度屈曲120°～140°(130.42°±7.26°)、伸直0°;MRI检查显示ACL走行均正常。结论 关节镜下保留胫骨侧残端重建ACL治疗ACL断裂，一方面可促进移植物血管再生、神经纤维长入重建的韧带，利于移植肌腱再血管化、爬行替代和膝关节本体感觉的建立；另一方面由于残端韧带对重建韧带的包裹，避免了关节液侵袭骨隧道，更利于膝关节稳定性和功能恢复。     

导航辅助前十字韧带单束与双束重建的比较研究

 目的 比较导航辅助前十字韧带单束与双束重建的临床效果。方法 对导航辅助的前十字韧带单束与双束重建病例进行回顾性队列研究, 单束重建组29 例、双束重建组28 例, 分别使用导航辅助单束、双束重建技术。两组术前KT-1000 患侧与健侧膝关节前向稳定性差值、轴移试验、国际膝关节评分委员会(International Knee Documentation Committee, IKDC)膝关节功能评级的差异均无统计学意义。结果 两组病例随访时间均超过2 年。末次随访时单束重建组膝关节前向稳定性差值为(1.6±5.1)mm, 双束重建组为(2.2±3.0)mm, 差异无统计学意义。单束重建组轴移试验阳性率为14.3%, 双束重建组为29.6%, 差异无统计学意义。单束重建组IKDC 膝关节功能评级优于双束重建组, 差异有统计学意义。单束重建组10 例行二次关节镜检查, 均可见移植物连续且张力好;双束重建组28 例行二次关节镜检查, 8 例(28.6%, 8/28)可见后外束且张力较好, 15 例(53.6%, 15/28)可见后外束但松弛, 5 例(17.8%, 5/28)未见后外束。结论 导航辅助前十字韧带单束与双束重建术后早期膝关节稳定性相同, 单束重建患者对术后膝关节功能的主观评分优于双束重建患者。     

Double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions: a prospective,randomized study with 2-year follow-up

This prospective, randomized study was conducted to compare the short-term results of arthroscopic double-bundle with single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. One hundred and eight patients with a symptomatic ACL rupture were randomized to either double-bundle (Group DB) or single-bundle (Group SB) ACL reconstruction. Follow-up was conducted at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months postoperatively. At the 24-month follow-up, 94 of the 108 patients (87 %) were available for evaluation. The rotational stability, as evaluated by pivot shift test, was significantly superior in the Group DB to that in the Group SB. No significant difference with regard to ACL revisions, total flexion work, mean peak flexion torque and extension work between the groups was detected. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the Tegner activity score, the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score, the Lysholm functional score, anterior knee pain or mobility, subjective knee function. In addition, no significant difference in laxity on the Lachman test or the KT-1000 maximum manual force test was investigated. All the results were significantly more satisfactory at each follow-up period than preoperatively, in both groups. Both SB- and DB-ACL reconstruction resulted in satisfactory subjective outcome and objective stability. Both these techniques can therefore be considered as suitable alternatives for ACL reconstruction. Moreover, as it seems to be according to the pivot shift test, the risk for the development of degenerative changes of the knee joint in a long run could be smaller in the Group DB.     

自体四股胭绳肌腱单束与双束重建前交叉韧带临床疗效的对比研究

目的探讨关节镜下自体四股胭绳肌腱单束与双束重建前交叉韧带的临床疗效。方法2006年3月～2009年11月在关节镜下采用自体四股胭绳肌腱重建前交叉韧带46例,其中单束组26例,双束组20例,分别于术后3、6、12、18个月随访,比较2组膝关节稳定性,并按照IKDC膝关节评分标准进行疗效评价。结果末次随访（术后18个月）：双束组IKDC主观评分（89．2±4．5）分与单束组（85．7±4．9）分有统计学性差异（t=2．539,P=0．015）,2组前抽屉试验、Laehman试验阳性率均无统计学差异[7．7％（2／26）VS．0（0／20）,P=0．498;30．8％（8／26）VS．15．0％（3／20）,x2=1．878,P=0．391]。结论关节镜下白体四股胴绳肌腱单束与双束重建前交叉韧带均具有膝关节前向稳定性好等优点,但双束重建前交叉韧带膝关节主观评分优于单束重建。     

ACL reconstruction in sports active people: transtibial DB technique with ST/G vs. transtibial SB technique with BPTB: preliminary results

The single-bundle ACL reconstruction ensures good outcomes and it is a well-established and widespread technique. Nevertheless, some patients still present residual pain and instability. Recent studies have showed that the double-bundle technique restores better natural ACL-fitting kinematics. Long-term clinical studies comparing the two surgical techniques are not frequent and there is no instrument to evaluate function and kinematics during the knee rotation in vivo.In this randomised prospective study performed on sportive people, we compare the BPTB single-bundle ACL reconstruction technique, which is the most common surgical technique performed on these patients’ category, with the ACL double-bundle reconstruction technique (DB), in order to evaluate possible differences between the groups.Comparing the two groups, no statistically significant difference regarding the post-operative Lysholm score (p = 0.368) the Tegner activity scale (p = 0.519) and the arthrometric evaluation with KT-1000 (p = 0.74) have been observed. On the contrary, the IKDC evaluation showed a statistically significant difference (p = 0.004) better results of the DB group. Moreover, as assessed by the Tegner activity scale, only patients of the DB group were able to return to sports at a pre-injury level.Our data suggest that the double bundle ST/G ACL reconstruction technique results into slightly better outcome than the traditional technique of single-bundle BPTB. The verification and quantification of the advantages of this technique is anticipated with future studies focusing to the accurate measurement of knee rotation during different activities.     

自体腘绳肌腱单、双束重建前交叉韧带临床比较研究

目的 比较自体腘绳肌腱单、双束重建前交叉韧带的临床效果.方法 2005年5月至12月采用双束重建前交叉韧带患者33例(双束组),单束重建患者41例(单束组),均采用自体半腱肌腱和股薄肌腱.双束组4例失访,随访时间14～22个月,平均18个月;单束组8例失访,随访时间14-21个月,平均18个月.采用国际膝关节评分委员会评分标准(IKDC),Lysholm和Tegner评分、KT-2000及Biodex肌力测试评价.结果 双束组IKDC,Lysholm和Tegner评分分别由术前的60、66、4分显著上升至术后的85、94、6分.KT-2000在134 N下30°和90°位移情况由术前的5.8和2.4 mm减少为术后1.2和1.1 mm(P＜0.01).双束组伤侧膝关节伸膝及屈膝的峰力矩在60°/s下,相对于正常侧分别为81%和87%,120°/s下为76%和85%.各项值均显著低于对侧(P＜0.01).尽管在30°位KT-2000测量值和伸膝肌力的恢复方面,双束重建较单束重建表现出了更好的趋势,但功能评分,KT测量值和BIODEX测量的结果,单、双束组差异无统计学意义.结论 自体胭绳肌腱单、双束重建前交叉韧带均可以恢复膝关节稳定,改善关节功能,双束重建患者在30°位前后稳定性和伸膝肌力方面表现出了较单束重建更好的趋势.     

Comparing the anatomic single-bundle versus the anatomic double-bundle for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective,randomized, single blind,clinical study

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the early results of anatomic single bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

Methods

We conducted a prospective randomized study of anatomic single-bundle versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction using the hamstring tendons of 67 patients with unilateral ACL deficiency. The subjects were randomized into two groups. The single-bundle group consisted of 37 patients and the double-bundle group 30 patients. We used the following evaluations: clinical examination, KT-1000 arthrometry, Tegner knee score, modified Cincinnati score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scale (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score. Two surgeons performed all operations, and a blinded independent author conducted the clinical follow-up assessments.

Results

The mean follow-up period was 25.8 months. The differences between the preoperative and postoperative clinical examinations and the KT-1000 measurements were statistically different in both groups (p?p?Conclusions This prospective study found no difference between the outcomes of the anatomic single-bundle and the anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstructions. Level of evidence II.     

Single-bundle versus double-bundle arthroscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: what does the available evidence suggest?

Abstract The introduction of the double-bundle technique as a surgical option for primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery stems from the hypothesis that replicating the double-bundle anatomy of the native ACL improves knee kinematics by supplying better rotational control. We performed a systematic review of the literature comparing double-bundle with standard single-bundle reconstruction methods. One RCT and three quasi-RCTs with a one-to two-year follow-up were included in this review. On the basis of these studies, ACL reconstruction with a double-bundle technique leads to less residual pivot-shift as assessed on manual and instrumented tests. Conflicting results exist as to whether the double-bundle technique leads to less side-to-side anterior tibial translation, and no significant differences were found regarding proprioception, flexorextensor peak torque and knee function as assessed with the International Knee Documentation Committee score. On the other hand, better subjective knee functionwas found in one quasi-RCT. However, there is a lack of correlation between these kinematic differences and an as yet unproven clinical effect. Uncertainties also exist regarding the mid- and long-term performances of the ACL reconstructed with a double-bundle technique. Comparison between the single-bundle and double-bundle techniques should be expanded to cover unresolved issues such as the rate of complications from a more challenging surgical technique, the risk of complicating revision surgery due to the presence of two tunnels, and the cost-effectiveness of a procedure with a higher consumption of fixation devices. The doublebundle technique should be further investigated by experienced knee surgeons in studies with higher methodological quality.     

前交叉韧带单束重建中股骨椭圆隧道技术与圆隧道技术的比较研究

目的通过与传统圆隧道技术相比,探讨前交叉韧带(anterior cruciate ligament,ACL)单束重建中采用椭圆隧道技术制备股骨隧道的疗效及优势。方法回顾分析2016年3月-2018年2月125例采用自体肌腱单束解剖重建ACL且符合选择标准的患者临床资料,其中43例术中采用椭圆隧道技术制备股骨隧道(A组),82例采用圆隧道技术(B组)。两组患者年龄、性别、体质量指数、病程、损伤侧别、损伤原因以及术前Lysholm评分、国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)评分、Tegner评分、KT-1000测量值等一般资料比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。记录两组患者术后3、6、12、24个月Lysholm评分、IKDC评分和Tegner评分,采用KT-1000评价关节稳定性。术后1d三维CT评估股骨和胫骨隧道位置。术后6、12、24个月MRI检查,测量ACL移植物近、中、远端信号/噪声比(signal/noise quotient,SNQ)。对行二次关节镜检查患者评价移植物完整性、滑膜覆盖以及张力情况。结果两组患者均获随访,随访时间12~26个月,平均23个月。A组2例、B组5例发生切口红肿,B组1例发生胫骨隧道裂纹骨折,A组1例发生膝关节屈曲活动度受限。除术后3个月Tegner评分外,其余各时间点A组Lysholm、IKDC、Tegner评分均明显高于B组(P<0.05)。术后各时间点A组KT-1000测量值亦明显小于B组(P<0.05)。术后1 d三维CT检查示两组股骨及胫骨隧道均位于ACL止点印迹内。MRI复查两组均无移植物断裂及明显松弛发生。术后6个月两组移植物中、远端SNQ差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),近端A组明显低于B组(P<0.05);术后12、24个月A组移植物近、中、远端SNQ均低于B组(P<0.05)。A组21例及B组38例患者进行二次关节镜检查,两组移植物完整性、滑膜覆盖及张力比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论与传统圆隧道技术相比,ACL单束重建术中采用椭圆隧道技术制备股骨隧道,术后移植物成熟度更好,患者能获得更好膝关节功能。