Outcomes After Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Suture Tape Augmentation and an Accelerated Rehabilitation Protocol: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Pub Date : 2025-02-06 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1177/23259671241308590
Arthur Cardoso Paroneto, Pedro Soneghet Gomes, Paulo Vitor Carrijo, Moises Cohen, Leonardo Addeo Ramos
{"title":"Outcomes After Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Suture Tape Augmentation and an Accelerated Rehabilitation Protocol: A Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Arthur Cardoso Paroneto, Pedro Soneghet Gomes, Paulo Vitor Carrijo, Moises Cohen, Leonardo Addeo Ramos","doi":"10.1177/23259671241308590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction is often performed for grade 3 PCL injuries, the effectiveness of different surgical techniques and rehabilitation protocols is a topic of debate.</p><p><strong>Purpose/hypothesis: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare functional outcomes and residual instability in patients who underwent PCL reconstruction with versus without suture tape augmentation. It was hypothesized was that adding high-resistance suture tape to PCL reconstruction would improve functional scores and reduce postoperative laxity.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 48 patients were included in the study; all patients underwent PCL reconstruction with an autologous quadriceps tendon graft and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Overall, 23 patients were treated with a graft only, while 25 were treated with a graft and suture tape. Patients in the suture tape augmentation group also underwent an accelerated rehabilitation program with earlier range of motion and weightbearing. Patient characteristics, Lysholm scores, posterior tibial laxity on stress radiographs at 90° of knee flexion, and postoperative complications were compared between treatment groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No statistically significant differences were found between groups in terms of patient characteristics. Similar results were seen in both groups in terms of postoperative complications. Furthermore, on average, the Lysholm score increased from 1- to 2-year follow-up by 6.99 points (standard error = 0.97 points; <i>P</i> < .001), indicating progressive functional improvement, and posterior tibial laxity decreased from preoperatively to postoperatively by 7.55 mm (standard error = 0.24 mm; <i>P</i> < .001), indicating an improvement in knee stability. Patients in both treatment groups saw significant improvements during the follow-up period in the Lysholm score and posterior tibial laxity (<i>P</i> < .001 for both).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PCL reconstruction with suture tape augmentation and an accelerated rehabilitation protocol did not result in significantly improved functional scores or postoperative laxity compared with isolated PCL reconstruction. The results showed no disadvantage of a more aggressive rehabilitation protocol.</p>","PeriodicalId":19646,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"13 2","pages":"23259671241308590"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11806459/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671241308590","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Although posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction is often performed for grade 3 PCL injuries, the effectiveness of different surgical techniques and rehabilitation protocols is a topic of debate.

Purpose/hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare functional outcomes and residual instability in patients who underwent PCL reconstruction with versus without suture tape augmentation. It was hypothesized was that adding high-resistance suture tape to PCL reconstruction would improve functional scores and reduce postoperative laxity.

Study design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods: A total of 48 patients were included in the study; all patients underwent PCL reconstruction with an autologous quadriceps tendon graft and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Overall, 23 patients were treated with a graft only, while 25 were treated with a graft and suture tape. Patients in the suture tape augmentation group also underwent an accelerated rehabilitation program with earlier range of motion and weightbearing. Patient characteristics, Lysholm scores, posterior tibial laxity on stress radiographs at 90° of knee flexion, and postoperative complications were compared between treatment groups.

Results: No statistically significant differences were found between groups in terms of patient characteristics. Similar results were seen in both groups in terms of postoperative complications. Furthermore, on average, the Lysholm score increased from 1- to 2-year follow-up by 6.99 points (standard error = 0.97 points; P < .001), indicating progressive functional improvement, and posterior tibial laxity decreased from preoperatively to postoperatively by 7.55 mm (standard error = 0.24 mm; P < .001), indicating an improvement in knee stability. Patients in both treatment groups saw significant improvements during the follow-up period in the Lysholm score and posterior tibial laxity (P < .001 for both).

Conclusion: PCL reconstruction with suture tape augmentation and an accelerated rehabilitation protocol did not result in significantly improved functional scores or postoperative laxity compared with isolated PCL reconstruction. The results showed no disadvantage of a more aggressive rehabilitation protocol.

后交叉韧带重建与缝合带增强和加速康复方案的结果:一项回顾性队列研究。
背景:虽然后交叉韧带(PCL)重建通常用于3级PCL损伤,但不同的手术技术和康复方案的有效性是一个有争议的话题。目的/假设:本研究的目的是评估和比较行PCL重建与不缝合带增强的患者的功能结局和残余不稳定性。假设在PCL重建中加入高阻缝合带可以提高功能评分并减少术后松弛。研究设计:队列研究;证据水平,3。方法:共纳入48例患者;所有患者均采用自体股四头肌肌腱移植重建PCL,随访时间至少为2年。总的来说,23例患者仅接受移植物治疗,而25例患者接受移植物和缝合带治疗。缝合带增强组的患者也接受了早期活动范围和负重的加速康复计划。比较两组患者的特征、Lysholm评分、膝关节屈曲90°处应力片上胫骨后松弛程度以及术后并发症。结果:两组患者特征差异无统计学意义。两组在术后并发症方面的结果相似。此外,随访1至2年,Lysholm评分平均提高6.99分(标准误差= 0.97分;P < 0.001),表明功能渐进式改善,术后胫骨后松弛度较术前降低7.55 mm(标准误差= 0.24 mm;P < 0.001),表明膝关节稳定性得到改善。两组患者在随访期间Lysholm评分和胫骨后松弛度均有显著改善(P < 0.001)。结论:与孤立的PCL重建相比,缝合带增强PCL重建和加速康复方案并没有显著改善功能评分或术后松弛。结果显示更积极的康复方案没有缺点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
876
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine (OJSM), developed by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), is a global, peer-reviewed, open access journal that combines the interests of researchers and clinical practitioners across orthopaedic sports medicine, arthroscopy, and knee arthroplasty. Topics include original research in the areas of: -Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, including surgical and nonsurgical treatment of orthopaedic sports injuries -Arthroscopic Surgery (Shoulder/Elbow/Wrist/Hip/Knee/Ankle/Foot) -Relevant translational research -Sports traumatology/epidemiology -Knee and shoulder arthroplasty The OJSM also publishes relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信