Introduction: Recently, a new minimally invasive single bundle technique for anatomic ACL reconstruction has been described, called the ‘All-Inside graft-link technique’. One of the advantages of this procedure is the reduced morbidity at the donor site as the graft choice is the quadrupled semitendinosus, thus sparing the gracilis tendon. The aim of this study was to evaluate isokinetic flexion strength recovery in patients who underwent a gracilis sparing technique compared to those with a full-tibial tunnel technique using a doubled gracilis and semitendinosus tendons (DGST) graft.
Methods: Patients were divided into two groups: Group A (22 patients) who underwent ACL reconstruction performed with an All-Inside graft-link technique; Group B (22 patients) who underwent ACL reconstruction with an Out-In technique and DGST graft. At a mean follow-up of 13 months, quadriceps and hamstring isokinetic peak torque deficits were recorded.
Results: In group A, the mean side to side peak torque flexion difference between the operated and non-operated limbs was ?3% and the mean torque at 30° was ?7.5% at high angular velocity (180°/sec); the mean peak flexion torque was 7.2% and the mean torque at 30° was 3.1% at low angular velocity (60°/sec).
In group B, the mean side to side peak flexion torque was ?3.5% and the mean torque at 30° was ?7.6% at high angular velocity (180°/sec); the mean peak flexion torque was ?7.2% and the mean torque at 30° was ?11% at low angular velocity (60°/sec).
A statistically significant difference was found between the two groups at lower angular velocity both for the mean peak flexion torque and the mean torque at 30° (p = 0.009), with better results in the study group.
Discussion/conclusion: Gracilis sparing technique is a minimally invasive technique for ACL reconstruction and yielded a significantly better flexion strength recovery at lower angular velocity compared to a full tibial tunnel technique with DGST for ACL reconstruction. 相似文献
Objectives: There is a paucity of reporting on surgical outcomes of isolated posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (PCLR). We hypothesize that isolated PCL injuries failing nonoperative treatment achieve good outcomes and are able to return to sport following PCLR.
Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed to identify patients with isolated PCL injuries that underwent reconstruction between 2001 and 2014. Patients with multi-ligamentous injury or another concomitant knee pathology were excluded. Medical records were reviewed for demographic, clinical and operative data. Patients were contacted for administration of a telephone-based questionnaire which included the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation form, Lysholm-Tegner scales, Marx activity scale (MAS), return to sport status, and patient satisfaction instruments.
Results: A total of 15 isolated PCL reconstructions in 14 patients with a mean age of 27.5 years (range 17–43) met the study inclusion criteria; mean follow up was 6.3 years (range 1.4–15.2). Pre-operatively, the primary complaint was knee instability in all patients; on physical examination, lack of a firm end point during posterior drawer testing was found in 93% (14/15) of the knees. In total, 12 of 15 knees underwent transtibial, single-bundle PCLR and three of 15 underwent tibial inlay, double bundle PCLR. Graft types included: quadriceps autograft (7/15), Achilles allograft (6/15), and hamstring autograft (2/15). There were no graft failures in our patient cohort. At most recent follow up the mean scores respectively on the IKDC form, Lysholm-Tegner scales and MAS were (standard deviation): 77.3 (16.5), 83.1 (17.9), 6.13 (2.6), and 7.1 (6.0). All fourteen patients were athletes prior to their injury and 79% (11/14) returned to sport and overall patient satisfaction was 9.2/10.
Conclusions: Isolated PCLR provides good outcomes at mean medium-term follow up with restoration of function, high rate of return to sport and overall patient satisfaction. 相似文献
Online physician rating websites are increasingly used by patients to evaluate their doctors. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate factors associated with better spine surgeon ratings.
METHODS
Orthopedic spine surgeons were randomly selected from the North American Spine Society directory utilizing a random number generator. Surgeon profiles on three physician rating websites, namely, www.HealthGrades.com, www.Vitals.com, and www.RateMDs.com, were analyzed to gather qualitative and quantitative data on patients’ perceptions of the surgeons. Independent variables from the websites were analyzed in relation to overall physician or patient satisfaction rating. Comments were coded by subject into following three categories: professional competence, bedside manner, and practice characteristics.
RESULTS
A total of 250 surgeons were evaluated, and 92% (n=230) of these doctors had at least one rating among the three websites. The surgeons with a higher average rating had significantly better trust (p<.01), scheduling (p<.01), staff (p<.01), helpfulness (p<.01), and punctuality (p<.01) scores but significantly less experience (p<.05). A linear regression model for the average rating of each surgeon (R2 value=0.754) yielded only following three significant variables: trustworthiness (p<.01), experience match (p<.05), and the average number of negative comments on surgeon's professional competence (p<.05). Trustworthiness (β=0.749) was the strongest predictor variable of physician rating, followed by the number of negative professional competence comments (β=?0.132) and experience match (β=?0.112).
CONCLUSIONS
This investigation assessed spine surgeon online patient ratings and categorized factors that patients associate with quality care. Trustworthiness was the most significant predictor of positive ratings, whereas ease of scheduling, quality of staff, helpfulness, and punctuality were also associated with higher patient ratings. Understanding what patients value may help optimize care of spine surgery patients. 相似文献
BackgroundCharcot neuroarthropathy is a complex condition characterised by progressive deformity, limited treatment options and a high amputation rate. Surgical reconstruction of Charcot foot has been proposed as a method to preserve the foot. However, limited information exists on the different methods of reconstruction available, their outcomes and complications.MethodsWe systematically analysed published data from Jan 1993 to Dec 2018 to assess methods of fixation and associated outcomes for the surgical reconstruction in Charcot neuroarthropathy. Statistical analyses were undertaken to determine the amputation rates, return to ambulation and complications associated with these techniques.ResultsA total of 1116 feet (1089 patients) were reported to have undergone reconstruction with significant heterogeneity in patient selection. Of these, 726 (65%) were reported to undergo internal fixation, 346 feet (31%) external fixation and 44 (4%) undergoing simultaneous internal and external fixation. No single technique demonstrated a significant benefit over the other. Overall, the bone fusion rate was 86.1%. Complications directly attributable to the technique employed were noted in 36% of individuals. The reported post-reconstruction amputation rate was only 5.5% with 91% apparently returning to ambulation.ConclusionsAlthough no preferential method of fixation was identified, we find that the current options for surgical reconstruction could offer limb salvage with a low amputation risk in a highly selected population. However, the lack of controlled studies, inconsistent reporting of outcomes and heterogeneity of patient selection mean that the quality of evidence is low. 相似文献
Long-term follow-up of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) is essential in both modern spinal care and research. Lack of time and staff are commonly reported barriers to implementing long-term follow-up of PROM. Automated and digital follow-up systems for PROM collection are seeing widespread use, yet their validity and comparative effectiveness have never been evaluated.
Purpose
The present study aimed to assess the validity of digital follow-up systems in comparison with the conventional paper-based follow-up (PB-FU).
Study Design
This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected double follow-up data.
Patient Sample
Patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion for spondylolisthesis or degenerative disc disease between 2013 and 2016 were included in the study.
Outcome Measures
The study determined the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for back and leg pain severity at baseline, 6 weeks, 12 months, and 24 months.
Materials and Methods
After lumbar spinal fusion surgery, a double follow-up of PROM was carried out by conventional PB-FU during clinical visits, while simultaneously completing an automatically dispatched digital follow-up questionnaire. As the primary end point, we assessed the intraindividual discrepancy in PROM between PB-FU and automated digital follow-up (AD-FU).
Results
Forty patients completed all parts of the dual follow-up trajectory and were analyzed. We detected no discrepancy in ODI or NRS for back and leg pain severity at any of the baseline, 6-week, 12-month, or 24 month follow-ups (all p>.05). This was confirmed in a sensitivity analysis.
Conclusions
In an analysis of dual paper-based and digital follow-up after lumbar fusion surgery, patients report highly similar values using either method of follow-up. It appears that AD-FU without incentives produces lower response rates. To reassess the validity of these systems for data collection in spinal patient care, a prospective validation with higher statistical power is warranted. 相似文献