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。     

关节镜下双束重建与单束重建膝前交叉韧带的效果比较

目的比较双束重建与单束重建膝前交叉韧带(ACL)的临床效果。方法分别对31例和30例膝前交叉韧带损伤患者行双束重建与单束重建手术,通过关节稳定性试验、Tegner体育量表评分和术后满意度来评价疗效。结果双束组和单束组Lachman试验阳性分别为1例和7例(P<0.05);边对边差异<3 mm分别为27例和19例(P<0.05);Tegner体育量表评分双束组优于单束组。结论双束重建符合正常膝ACL的空间结构,更能满足膝关节伸直位和扭转位时的生物力学要求。     

单束单隧道与双束双隧道重建膝前交叉韧带的生物力学对比研究

[目的]研究双束股骨双隧道法重建前交叉韧带(ACL)恢复膝关节前后方向稳定性的能力,并与单束单隧道重建法进行生物力学性能的比较。[方法]应用跟腱分别采用双束股骨双隧道、单前内侧束和单后外侧束三种方法对10个新鲜尸体膝关节进行前交叉韧带重建。术后分别于膝关节屈曲0°、15°、30°、60°及90°时对胫骨施行±100 N的作用力,测量胫骨相对于股骨移动的距离。[结果]在屈膝角度较小(0°~30°)的情况下,单前内侧束重建法术后胫骨的移动距离与完整标本接近(P>0.05);但屈曲超过30°,特别是超过60°后,单前内侧束重建法术后胫骨移动的距离明显大于完整标本(P<0.05)。在屈膝角度<60°的情况下,单后外侧束重建法胫骨移动的距离明显大于完整标本(P<0.05):但屈曲超过60°胫骨移动的距离与完整标本接近(P>0.05);在膝关节的整个屈曲范围(0°~90°)内,双束股骨双隧道重建法术后胫骨移动的距离与完整标本接近(P>0.05)。[结论]双束股骨双隧道重建法,在膝关节的整个屈曲范围(0°~90°)内,比单束股骨单隧道重建法能更有效的恢复膝关节的稳定性。     

关节镜下人工韧带移植重建膝前后交叉韧带

目的回顾性研究关节镜下应用人工韧带重建膝交叉韧带的疗效。方法应用LARS人工韧带对16例交叉韧带损伤行关节镜下重建,术后予以早期康复锻练,对临床疗效进行回顾性分析。结果手术时间55～96min,平均65min。16例均随访3～30个月,平均16个月。术后无滑膜炎、韧带断裂、活动受限等并发症。按照IKDC评分标准及Lysholm膝关节功能评分进行评估,术后膝关节功能均得到良好恢复。结论LARS人工韧带的应用能避免取材部位的并发症,操作简便,可早期康复锻炼,极好的恢复关节屈伸度,获得满意疗效。     

LARS人工韧带关节镜下重建膝前交叉韧带

目的 探讨关节镜下LARS人工韧带治疗膝关节前交叉韧带（ACL）完全性损伤的疗效。方法对12例ACL完全损伤患者实施关节镜下LARS人工韧带重建术。结果12例均获随访,时间3～11个月,膝关节前直向不稳症状均消失,前抽屉试验阴性,关节功能良好,未并发急性滑膜炎。患膝伸屈度0°～120°。根据Lysholm膝关节评分法,膝关节评分由术前（45．45±1．18）分提高到术后（84．77±2．26）分。结论LARS人工韧带组织相容性好,是理想的韧带移植材料。关节镜下LARS人工韧带重建ACL完全性损伤疗效好,创伤小,并发症少,患膝稳定性早期即可完全恢复,术后关节功能能达到正常运动要求。     

关节镜下个体化前交叉韧带单束与双束解剖重建的近期疗效比较

目的 探讨关节镜下个体化单束与双束解剖重建前交叉韧带(ACL)的技术,并比较二者的近期疗效.方法回顾性分析2007年3月到2009年9月行ACL个体化单、双束解剖重建且获得随访的117例ACL损伤患者资料,根据不同解剖重建方法分为两组:A组(个体化单束解剖重建)35例,男31例,女4例;平均年龄(28.6±5.1)岁.B组(个体化双束解剖重建)82例,男73例,女9例;平均年龄(27.6±5.4)岁.两组患者术前一般资料比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),具有可比性.采用Lachman试验、轴移试验、KT-2000、国际膝关节评分委员会(IKDC)评分及Lysholm评分比较两组患者的疗效.结果 117例患者术后获11～25个月(平均15个月)随访.末次随访时Lachman试验结果:与健侧比较,A组完全正常者占88.6%(31/35),B组占95.1%(78/82);轴移试验结果:与健侧比较,A组完全正常者占88.6%(31/35),B组占96.3%(79/82);Lysholm评分:A组平均为(93.4±8.2)分,B组平均为(93.7±7.0)分,以上指标两组比较差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05).而KT-2000检测结果:A组平均为(1.4±0.6)mm,B组平均为(1.1±0.5)mm;A组IKDC评分正常者(A级)占71.4%(25/35),B组占93.9%(77/82),两组比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论采用个体化解剖位双束重建能更好地恢复患者膝关节的稳定性.双束解剖重建术中ACL股骨与胫骨足迹、髁间窝宽度的判断对手术的设计至关重要,3入路技术、测量尺的应用是个体化ACL双束解剖重建的关键所在.

Abstract：

Objective To compare clinical outcomes of double-bundle and single-bundle in individualized arthroscopic anatomical reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) . Methods The clinical data of 117 patients were reviewed who had received double-bundle or single-bundle arthroscopic ACL reconstruction from March 2007 through September 2009 in our hospital and had undergone complete follow-up. Of them, 35 cases had single-bundle ACL reconstruction and 82 double-bundle reconstruction. In the single-bundle group(group A), there were 31 men and 4 women, aged 28. 6 ±5. 1 years. In the double-bundle group(group B), there were 73 men and 9 women, aged 27. 6 ±5. 4 years. The 2 groups were comparable in the preoperative demographic data ( P > 0. 05). To evaluate the outcomes, Lachman and Pivot Shift exams , KT-2000, Lysholm and IKDC (International Knee Documentation Committee) scores, were adopted. Results The 117 patients received a mean follow-up of 15 months (from 11 to 25 months). The Lachman test showed 88. 6% (31/35) were normal in group A and 95. 1% (78/82) were normal in group B.The pivot-shift test showed 88. 6%(31/35) were normal in group A and 96. 3% (79/82) were normal in group B. Group A had a mean Lysholm score of 93. 4 ± 8. 2 and group B a mean Lysholm score of 93. 7 ±7. 0. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the above indexes ( P > 0. 05). By IKDC score, 71. 4% (25/135) were normal in group A and 93. 9% (77/82) were normal in group B. The KT-2000 test showed a mean of 1. 4 ± 0. 6 mm in group A and a mean of 1. 1 ± 0. 5 mm in group B. These 2 values were significantly different between the 2 groups ( P < 0. 05). Conclusions The individualized arthroscopic double-bundle anatomical reconstruction of ACL can maximally restore the anteroposterior and rotational stability. Arrangement of the ACL insertion site on the femoral and tibial side, three-portal technique and ruler application are keys for individualized anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction.     

关节镜下双束重建膝关节前交叉韧带的研究进展

前交叉韧带(anterior cruciate ligment,ACL)是膝关节内起稳定作用的重要结构,一旦损伤,可继发膝关节内软骨、半月板损伤,关节退变等后果.长期以来,ACL的重建主要是针对其前内侧束,但大量的临床结果已经显示出单束重建的缺陷和劣势.数据显示单束重建ACL的成功率为69%～95%[6,13,24],失败率也高达10%～30%[30],并且有15%～30%的患者轴移试验阳性[16-17,20],随着关节镜技术的发展和对ACL的解剖和功能的认识加深,在关节镜下ACL双束重建技术已日趋成熟.虽然仍有很多学者对其持保留态度,但其仍不失为一项较为先进的手术技术.     

关节镜下个体化前交叉韧带单束与双束解剖重建的近期疗效比较

Objective To compare clinical outcomes of double-bundle and single-bundle in individualized arthroscopic anatomical reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) . Methods The clinical data of 117 patients were reviewed who had received double-bundle or single-bundle arthroscopic ACL reconstruction from March 2007 through September 2009 in our hospital and had undergone complete follow-up. Of them, 35 cases had single-bundle ACL reconstruction and 82 double-bundle reconstruction. In the single-bundle group(group A), there were 31 men and 4 women, aged 28. 6 ±5. 1 years. In the double-bundle group(group B), there were 73 men and 9 women, aged 27. 6 ±5. 4 years. The 2 groups were comparable in the preoperative demographic data ( P > 0. 05). To evaluate the outcomes, Lachman and Pivot Shift exams , KT-2000, Lysholm and IKDC (International Knee Documentation Committee) scores, were adopted. Results The 117 patients received a mean follow-up of 15 months (from 11 to 25 months). The Lachman test showed 88. 6% (31/35) were normal in group A and 95. 1% (78/82) were normal in group B.The pivot-shift test showed 88. 6%(31/35) were normal in group A and 96. 3% (79/82) were normal in group B. Group A had a mean Lysholm score of 93. 4 ± 8. 2 and group B a mean Lysholm score of 93. 7 ±7. 0. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in the above indexes ( P > 0. 05). By IKDC score, 71. 4% (25/135) were normal in group A and 93. 9% (77/82) were normal in group B. The KT-2000 test showed a mean of 1. 4 ± 0. 6 mm in group A and a mean of 1. 1 ± 0. 5 mm in group B. These 2 values were significantly different between the 2 groups ( P < 0. 05). Conclusions The individualized arthroscopic double-bundle anatomical reconstruction of ACL can maximally restore the anteroposterior and rotational stability. Arrangement of the ACL insertion site on the femoral and tibial side, three-portal technique and ruler application are keys for individualized anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction.     

关节镜下膝前交叉韧带与后交叉韧带联合重建

[目的]探讨膝关节双交叉韧带损伤的临床特点,评估关节镜下前交叉韧带(ACL)与后交叉韧带(PCL)联合重建的技术和效果。[方法]自2001年9月~2005年2月,13例病人(13膝)经关节镜检查证实ACL和PCL均断裂,其中5膝伴后内侧角(PMC)、内侧副韧带损伤(MCL),4膝伴后外侧角损伤(PLC),2膝伴外侧半月板破裂,1膝伴内侧半月板损伤,3膝伴腘动脉损伤,2膝伴腓总神经损伤。7例病人于损伤后急性期入院,2膝于急性期行腘血管探查修复,4膝行膝后内侧角、内侧副韧带修复。13例病人于伤后4~12周在关节镜下行自体移植物单束ACL和PCL联合重建术,其中4例同期后1/2股二头肌腱重建后PLC,1例同期阔筋膜PMC、MCL重建。[结果]本组术后早期均未发生严重并发症。术后随访10~39个月,平均(21.85±9.28)个月,Lysholm膝关节功能评分为75~95分,平均(86.54±6.89)分。国际膝关节文件编制委员会(IKDC)综合评定由术前显著异常(D级)13例,改进为随访时正常(A级)3例、接近正常(B级)8例、异常(C级)2例。13例病人中,11例恢复至伤前运动水平,2例运动水平较伤前减低。[结论]膝关节双交叉韧带损伤多伴有其它重要结构损伤,需妥善处理合并损伤。关节镜下自体移植物联合单束重建ACL和PCL创伤小、手术操作精细,术后膝关节功能恢复满意。     

关节镜下膝前交叉韧带重建术疗效分析

目的：探讨自体中1／3骨－髌腱－骨（B－PT－B）重建前交叉韧带（ACL）的临床效果。方法：1996年9月－2000年10月对13例膝ACL损伤，其中男9例，女4例，年龄23－45岁。均采用关节镜下自体中1／3B－PT－B重建ACL，挤压螺钉固定，治疗CAL损伤后关节不稳定，术前抽屉试验13例均为阳性，轴移试验4例阳性，Lachman试验7例阳性，术后获随访5－25个月，平均15个月。结果：术后屉试验，轴移试验和Lachman试验均转阴性。按照Bosaotta的术后临床指标评价方法，优9例，良3例，可1例，所有患者均感膝关节稳定性明显改善。结论：关节镜下自体中1／3B－PT－B重建ACL损伤疗效显著。     

前交叉韧带单束和双束重建比较研究的现状

正前交叉韧带(anterior cruciate ligament,ACL)是维持膝关节前后稳定性的主要结构之一,ACL断裂的患者,会继发半月板损伤和膝关节退变~[1]。ACL断裂后进行关节镜下微创手术重建的数量也越来越多~[2]。ACL重建的手术方法有多种~[3-6]。近年来,对ACL重建术式的争论焦点多集中在单束重建或双束重建方面~[7]。虽然也有股骨和胫骨骨道都是3个的ACL解剖3束     

前交叉韧带双束与单束重建术临床结果比较的Meta分析

目的比较前交叉韧带双束重建术和单束重建术的中长期临床疗效。方法依照Cochrane系统评价方法比较随机对照或半随机对照试验,计算机检索Scopus,Pubmed,Medline和Cochrane等数据库,选择符合条件文献并作出方法学评估后,统计分析在Revman5．1上进行。结果纳入文献25篇,双束重建的结果在KT-1000（WMD=-0．31,P〈0．05;WMD=-0．59,P〈0．01）,IKDC评分（RR=1．43,P〈0．05;RR=1．17,P〈0．01）,长期Lachman（RR=1．32,P〈0．01）和长期Tegner运动评分（RR=0．37,P〈0．01）优于单束重建;轴移试验中期随访结果双束组更好（RR=1．20,P〈0．01）,但长期效果无区别。结论通过Meta分析本文发现相比单束重建术,双束重建术能更好的恢复膝关节的生物力学。由于双束重建后生物力学性质更接近正常,可能更好的保护包括软骨在内的关节内组织。因此认为双束重建术总体临床效果优于单束重建术。     

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.     

前交叉韧带单束重建和双束解剖重建短期临床疗效的病例对照研究

目的:比较关节镜下采用单束重建和双束重建前交叉韧带的临床效果。方法:自2009年1月至2010年5月,45例前交叉韧带撕裂患者分别行前交叉韧带解剖双束重建(双束重建组)和自体腘绳肌腱前交叉韧带单束重建(单束重建组)。双束组22例,男15例,女7例;年龄(27.04±3.68)岁;运动损伤3例,交通损伤19例。单束组18例,男13例,女5例;年龄(28.16±4.76)岁;运动损伤2例,交通损伤16例。按照IKDC、Lysholm膝关节评分标准及Lachman试验、轴移试验及KT-1000评估疗效。结果:双束重建组22例、单束重建组18例均获随访,时间12个月。单束重建组IKDC评分从术前(41.40±6.30)分提高至(95.70±3.10)分;Lysholm评分从(47.20±6.30)分提高至(94.20±2.40)分,双束重建组IKDC评分从术前(40.90±6.10)分提高至(96.10±3.40)分,Lysholm膝关节评分从术前(48.10±6.50)分提高至(95.10±2.49)分,两组差异无统计学意义。两组患者中均有1例Lachman试验I度阳性,1例轴移试验阳性。双束重建组KT-1000值(1.5±1.2)mm,单束重建组KT-1000值(1.9±1.5)mm,两组差异无统计学意义。结论:关节镜下采用单束重建和双束重建前交叉韧带临床疗效无明显差异。     

Kinematic study following double-bundle, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

The purpose of this study was to evaluate tibiofemoral kinematics after double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions and compare them with those of successful single-bundle reconstructions and contralateral normal knees using open MR images. We obtained MR images based on the flexion angle without weight-bearing, from 20 patients with successful unilateral single-bundle (10 patients) and double-bundle (10 patients) ACL reconstructions with tibialis anterior allografts and a minimum 1-year follow-up. The MR images of the contralateral uninjured knees were used as normal controls. Sagittal images of the mid-medial and mid-lateral sections of the tibiofemoral compartments were used to measure the translation of the femoral condyles relative to the tibia. The mean translations of the medial femoral condyles on the tibial plateaus during knee joint motion showed no significant differences among normal, single-bundle, and double-bundle ACL reconstructed knees (all p>0.05). The mean translations of the lateral femoral condyles showed a significant difference between normal and single-bundle reconstructed knees, or between single-bundle and double-bundle reconstructed knees (p<0.05). However, there was no significant difference between normal and double-bundle reconstructed knees (p=0.220). These findings suggest that double-bundle ACL reconstruction restores normal kinematic tibiofemoral motion better than single-bundle reconstruction.     

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。     

关节镜下单、双束同种异体肌腱重建前交叉韧带的疗效比较

目的比较研究关节镜下单、双束同种异体肌腱重建前交叉韧带(anterior cruciate ligament,ACL)的临床疗效。方法将2008年1月-2009年1月符合选择标准的105例ACL损伤患者,根据重建方法不同随机分为单束重建组(n=59)及双束重建组(n=46),移植物均采用同种异体深低温冻存肌腱。于术后6、12、24个月进行随访,共93例患者完成随访,其中单束重建组51例,双束重建组42例。两组患者性别、年龄、身高、体重、病程、合并伤等一般资料比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),具有可比性;两组患者术前国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)评分以及Lysholm评分差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),前抽屉试验、Lachman试验均为阳性(+),轴移试验均为Ⅱ度阳性(++)。结果两组患者术后切口均为Ⅰ期愈合,无骨折、感染、下肢深静脉血栓形成等并发症发生。术后6、12个月,两组IKDC评分及Lysholm评分比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);术后12个月,两组Lachman试验、前抽屉试验及轴移试验结果比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);术后24个月,除前抽屉试验外,双束重建组IKDC评分、Lysholm评分、轴移试验和Lach-man试验以及KT-1000检测双膝前后位移差值均优于单束重建组,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论双束同种异体深低温冻存肌腱重建ACL的临床效果优于单束重建。     

Analysis of modified double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with implantless fixation on tibial side

Purpose: To avoid potential problems of double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), various modifications have been reported. This study analyzed a novel technique of modified doublebundle (MDB) ACLR without implant on tibial side in comparison to single-bundle (SB) ACLR. Methods: Eighty cases of isolated anterior cruciate ligament tear (40 each in SB group or MDB group) were included. SB ACLR was performed by outside in technique with quadrupled hamstring graft fixed with interference screws. In MDB group, ACLR harvested tendons were looped over each other at the center and free ends whipstitched. Femoral tunnel was created by outside in technique. Anteromedial tibial tunnel was created with tibial guide at 55. The anatomic posterolateral aiming guide (SmithNephew) was used to create posterolateral tunnel. With the help of shuttle sutures, the free end of gracillis was passed through posterolateral tunnel to femoral tunnel followed by semitendinosus graft through anteromedial tunnel to femoral tunnel. On tibial side the graft was looped over bone-bridge between external apertures of anteromedial and posterolateral tunnel. Graft was fixed with interference screw on femoral side in 10 knee flexion. International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner score, Pivot shift and knee laxity test (KLT, Karl-Storz) were recorded pre- and post-surgery. At one year magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was done. Statistical analysis was done by SPSS software. Results: Mean preoperative KLT reading of (10.00 ± 1.17) mm in MDB group improved to (4.10 ± 0.56) mm and in SB group it improved from (10.00 ± 0.91) mm to (4.80 ± 0.46) mm. The mean preoperative IKDC score in MDB group improved from (49.49 ± 8.00) to (92.5 ± 1.5) at one year and that in SB group improved from (52.5 ± 6.9) to (88.4 ± 2.6). At one-year 92.5% cases in MDB group achieved their preinjury Tegner activity level as compared to 60% in SB group. The improvement in IKDC, KLT and Tegner scale of MDB group was superior to SB group. MRI confirmed graft integrity at one year and clinically at 2 years. Conclusion: MDB ACLR has shown better outcome than SB ACLR. It is a simple technique that does not require fixation on tibial side and resultant graft is close to native ACL.