种植体约束和韧带修复对TKA内侧副韧带损伤后腔室平衡的影响。

Alirio J deMeireles,Mouhanad M El-Othmani,Thomas R Gardner,Hui Zhang,Nana O Sarpong,Carl L Herndon,Roshan P Shah,H John Cooper,Jeffrey A Geller,Alexander L Neuwirth
{"title":"种植体约束和韧带修复对TKA内侧副韧带损伤后腔室平衡的影响。","authors":"Alirio J deMeireles,Mouhanad M El-Othmani,Thomas R Gardner,Hui Zhang,Nana O Sarpong,Carl L Herndon,Roshan P Shah,H John Cooper,Jeffrey A Geller,Alexander L Neuwirth","doi":"10.2106/jbjs.24.01327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nAn intraoperative midsubstance injury to the medial collateral ligament (MCL) is a devastating complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). No single treatment method has been shown to yield optimal stability. This cadaveric study compared primary MCL repair, increasing prosthetic constraint, and a combination of both techniques on tibiofemoral compartment gapping after an iatrogenic MCL injury.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nWe performed 16 cadaveric, robotic-assisted TKAs (CORI; Smith+Nephew) and recorded tibiofemoral gap measurements at 10°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion with a posterior-stabilized (PS) prosthesis as the control group. The experimental groups had no MCL repair and a PS component, no MCL repair and a varus-valgus constrained (VVC) component, MCL repair with a PS component, and MCL repair with a VVC component. The MCL was repaired with 2 figure-8 nonabsorbable sutures. Gap measurements were manually tensioned by the same surgeon for all specimens. The mean medial tibiofemoral gap with the 3 different methods of interest (the no MCL repair with VVC component group, the MCL repair with PS component group, and the MCL repair with VVC component group) was compared with the control group for the rate of deficit (RD) and was compared with the no MCL repair and PS component group for the rate of improvement (RI). Simple statistics were used to calculate the mean medial balance for the groups, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) modeling was used to determine the mean changes in RD and RI, with significance set at p < 0.05.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nThe mean RD was highest for the no MCL repair with PS component group at 621.13%, demonstrating an approximately 6-fold increase in medial tibiofemoral gapping compared with the control group. This was followed by the no MCL repair with VVC component group at 93.02%, the MCL repair with PS component group at 65.66%, and the MCL repair with VVC component group at 20.01% (p < 0.001). The mean RI for the MCL repair with VVC component group was highest at 83.08%, meaning that the combination of VVC component and MCL repair resulted in an 83% improvement in medial tibiofemoral gapping from no MCL repair with PS component. This was followed by the MCL repair with PS component group at 76.62% and the no MCL repair with VVC component group at 72.95% (p < 0.001).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nThis cadaveric study demonstrates that primary MCL repair with VVC component was the best for minimizing the deficit after an MCL injury and provided the highest RI. MCL repair with PS component and no MCL repair with VVC component were less effective reconstructive choices. This study supports the combination of a simple MCL repair with VVC component as the most stable reconstructive option following an intraoperative MCL injury.","PeriodicalId":22625,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effect of Implant Constraint and Ligament Repair on Compartment Balancing After Medial Collateral Ligament Injury in TKA.\",\"authors\":\"Alirio J deMeireles,Mouhanad M El-Othmani,Thomas R Gardner,Hui Zhang,Nana O Sarpong,Carl L Herndon,Roshan P Shah,H John Cooper,Jeffrey A Geller,Alexander L Neuwirth\",\"doi\":\"10.2106/jbjs.24.01327\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\r\\nAn intraoperative midsubstance injury to the medial collateral ligament (MCL) is a devastating complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). No single treatment method has been shown to yield optimal stability. This cadaveric study compared primary MCL repair, increasing prosthetic constraint, and a combination of both techniques on tibiofemoral compartment gapping after an iatrogenic MCL injury.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nWe performed 16 cadaveric, robotic-assisted TKAs (CORI; Smith+Nephew) and recorded tibiofemoral gap measurements at 10°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion with a posterior-stabilized (PS) prosthesis as the control group. The experimental groups had no MCL repair and a PS component, no MCL repair and a varus-valgus constrained (VVC) component, MCL repair with a PS component, and MCL repair with a VVC component. The MCL was repaired with 2 figure-8 nonabsorbable sutures. Gap measurements were manually tensioned by the same surgeon for all specimens. The mean medial tibiofemoral gap with the 3 different methods of interest (the no MCL repair with VVC component group, the MCL repair with PS component group, and the MCL repair with VVC component group) was compared with the control group for the rate of deficit (RD) and was compared with the no MCL repair and PS component group for the rate of improvement (RI). Simple statistics were used to calculate the mean medial balance for the groups, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) modeling was used to determine the mean changes in RD and RI, with significance set at p < 0.05.\\r\\n\\r\\nRESULTS\\r\\nThe mean RD was highest for the no MCL repair with PS component group at 621.13%, demonstrating an approximately 6-fold increase in medial tibiofemoral gapping compared with the control group. This was followed by the no MCL repair with VVC component group at 93.02%, the MCL repair with PS component group at 65.66%, and the MCL repair with VVC component group at 20.01% (p < 0.001). The mean RI for the MCL repair with VVC component group was highest at 83.08%, meaning that the combination of VVC component and MCL repair resulted in an 83% improvement in medial tibiofemoral gapping from no MCL repair with PS component. This was followed by the MCL repair with PS component group at 76.62% and the no MCL repair with VVC component group at 72.95% (p < 0.001).\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSIONS\\r\\nThis cadaveric study demonstrates that primary MCL repair with VVC component was the best for minimizing the deficit after an MCL injury and provided the highest RI. MCL repair with PS component and no MCL repair with VVC component were less effective reconstructive choices. This study supports the combination of a simple MCL repair with VVC component as the most stable reconstructive option following an intraoperative MCL injury.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22625,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.24.01327\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.24.01327","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:术中内侧副韧带(MCL)的中间物质损伤是全膝关节置换术(TKA)的致命并发症。没有一种单一的处理方法被证明能产生最佳的稳定性。本尸体研究比较了医源性MCL损伤后,原发性MCL修复、增加假体约束以及两种技术联合治疗胫股间室间隙的效果。方法我们进行了16例尸体机器人辅助tka (CORI;Smith+Nephew),并使用后稳定假体作为对照组,记录屈曲10°、30°、60°和90°时的胫股间隙测量。实验组无MCL修复和PS组件、无MCL修复和外翻受限(VVC)组件、MCL修复合并PS组件和MCL修复合并VVC组件。用2根8字形不可吸收缝合线修复MCL。所有标本的间隙测量由同一外科医生手动拉伸。将3种不同修复方法(无MCL修复伴VVC成分组、MCL修复伴PS成分组、MCL修复伴VVC成分组)的平均胫股内侧间隙与对照组的缺损率(RD)进行比较,并与无MCL修复伴PS成分组的改善率(RI)进行比较。采用简单统计方法计算各组平均中间平衡,采用方差分析(ANOVA)模型确定RD和RI的平均变化,显著性设置为p < 0.05。结果无MCL修复与PS组件组的平均RD最高,为621.13%,表明内侧胫股间隙与对照组相比增加了约6倍。其次是无MCL修复组(93.02%)、有PS修复组(65.66%)和有VVC修复组(20.01%)(p < 0.001)。使用VVC组件修复MCL组的平均RI最高,为83.08%,这意味着与不使用PS组件修复MCL相比,使用VVC组件和MCL修复可使内侧胫股间隙改善83%。其次是有PS成分组的MCL修复率为76.62%,无VVC成分组的MCL修复率为72.95% (p < 0.001)。结论:本尸体研究表明,使用VVC成分的MCL初级修复可以最大限度地减少MCL损伤后的缺陷,并提供最高的RI。使用PS组件修复MCL和不使用VVC组件修复MCL效果较差。本研究支持简单的MCL修复与VVC组件相结合作为术中MCL损伤后最稳定的重建选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Effect of Implant Constraint and Ligament Repair on Compartment Balancing After Medial Collateral Ligament Injury in TKA.
BACKGROUND An intraoperative midsubstance injury to the medial collateral ligament (MCL) is a devastating complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). No single treatment method has been shown to yield optimal stability. This cadaveric study compared primary MCL repair, increasing prosthetic constraint, and a combination of both techniques on tibiofemoral compartment gapping after an iatrogenic MCL injury. METHODS We performed 16 cadaveric, robotic-assisted TKAs (CORI; Smith+Nephew) and recorded tibiofemoral gap measurements at 10°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion with a posterior-stabilized (PS) prosthesis as the control group. The experimental groups had no MCL repair and a PS component, no MCL repair and a varus-valgus constrained (VVC) component, MCL repair with a PS component, and MCL repair with a VVC component. The MCL was repaired with 2 figure-8 nonabsorbable sutures. Gap measurements were manually tensioned by the same surgeon for all specimens. The mean medial tibiofemoral gap with the 3 different methods of interest (the no MCL repair with VVC component group, the MCL repair with PS component group, and the MCL repair with VVC component group) was compared with the control group for the rate of deficit (RD) and was compared with the no MCL repair and PS component group for the rate of improvement (RI). Simple statistics were used to calculate the mean medial balance for the groups, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) modeling was used to determine the mean changes in RD and RI, with significance set at p < 0.05. RESULTS The mean RD was highest for the no MCL repair with PS component group at 621.13%, demonstrating an approximately 6-fold increase in medial tibiofemoral gapping compared with the control group. This was followed by the no MCL repair with VVC component group at 93.02%, the MCL repair with PS component group at 65.66%, and the MCL repair with VVC component group at 20.01% (p < 0.001). The mean RI for the MCL repair with VVC component group was highest at 83.08%, meaning that the combination of VVC component and MCL repair resulted in an 83% improvement in medial tibiofemoral gapping from no MCL repair with PS component. This was followed by the MCL repair with PS component group at 76.62% and the no MCL repair with VVC component group at 72.95% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS This cadaveric study demonstrates that primary MCL repair with VVC component was the best for minimizing the deficit after an MCL injury and provided the highest RI. MCL repair with PS component and no MCL repair with VVC component were less effective reconstructive choices. This study supports the combination of a simple MCL repair with VVC component as the most stable reconstructive option following an intraoperative MCL injury.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信