一项前瞻性随机研究关节镜下前交叉韧带重建与可调节与固定环装置股骨侧固定。

IF 4.1 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Naiyer Asif, Mohammad Jesan Khan, K P Haris, Shah Waliullah, Anubhav Sharma, Danish Firoz
{"title":"一项前瞻性随机研究关节镜下前交叉韧带重建与可调节与固定环装置股骨侧固定。","authors":"Naiyer Asif,&nbsp;Mohammad Jesan Khan,&nbsp;K P Haris,&nbsp;Shah Waliullah,&nbsp;Anubhav Sharma,&nbsp;Danish Firoz","doi":"10.1186/s43019-021-00124-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Suspensory devices are extensively used in the management of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear. They include fixed- and adjustable-loop devices. There are only a few studies comparing the efficacy of these two devices in the available literature. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes between the adjustable-loop device (group I) and fixed-loop device (group II).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This was a prospective randomized study. Both groups were equivalent in demographic, preoperative, and intraoperative variables. Twenty-three patients underwent femoral side graft fixation with adjustable-loop and 20 with fixed-loop devices. Four patients were lost to follow-up. Assessment of clinical outcome was done with International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm score, and knee stability tests (Lachman test and pivot shift test). Patient evaluation was performed preoperatively and finally postoperatively 2 years after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Postoperative IKDC scores of group I and II were 91.9 ± 3.6 and 91.5 ± 3.6, respectively, and Lysholm scores were 91.0 ± 3.6 and 91.4 ± 3.5, respectively, after 2 years; however, the difference in the outcomes was statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). Twenty patients (87%) in group I and 17 patients (85%) in group II had a negative Lachman test (p = 0.8). Twenty-two patients (95.7%) in group I and 19 patients (95%) in group II had a negative pivot shift test (p = 0.9).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ACL reconstruction with fixed- and adjustable-loop suspensory devices for graft fixation gives equivalent and satisfactory clinical results.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>1.</p>","PeriodicalId":17886,"journal":{"name":"Knee Surgery & Related Research","volume":"33 1","pages":"42"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8642980/pdf/","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A prospective randomized study of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with adjustable- versus fixed-loop device for femoral side fixation.\",\"authors\":\"Naiyer Asif,&nbsp;Mohammad Jesan Khan,&nbsp;K P Haris,&nbsp;Shah Waliullah,&nbsp;Anubhav Sharma,&nbsp;Danish Firoz\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s43019-021-00124-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Suspensory devices are extensively used in the management of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear. They include fixed- and adjustable-loop devices. There are only a few studies comparing the efficacy of these two devices in the available literature. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes between the adjustable-loop device (group I) and fixed-loop device (group II).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This was a prospective randomized study. Both groups were equivalent in demographic, preoperative, and intraoperative variables. Twenty-three patients underwent femoral side graft fixation with adjustable-loop and 20 with fixed-loop devices. Four patients were lost to follow-up. Assessment of clinical outcome was done with International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm score, and knee stability tests (Lachman test and pivot shift test). Patient evaluation was performed preoperatively and finally postoperatively 2 years after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Postoperative IKDC scores of group I and II were 91.9 ± 3.6 and 91.5 ± 3.6, respectively, and Lysholm scores were 91.0 ± 3.6 and 91.4 ± 3.5, respectively, after 2 years; however, the difference in the outcomes was statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). Twenty patients (87%) in group I and 17 patients (85%) in group II had a negative Lachman test (p = 0.8). Twenty-two patients (95.7%) in group I and 19 patients (95%) in group II had a negative pivot shift test (p = 0.9).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>ACL reconstruction with fixed- and adjustable-loop suspensory devices for graft fixation gives equivalent and satisfactory clinical results.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>1.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17886,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Knee Surgery & Related Research\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"42\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8642980/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Knee Surgery & Related Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-021-00124-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knee Surgery & Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-021-00124-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

目的:悬吊装置广泛应用于前交叉韧带撕裂的治疗。它们包括固定回路和可调回路装置。在现有文献中,只有少数研究比较了这两种装置的疗效。因此,本研究的目的是比较可调环装置(I组)和固定环装置(II组)的临床结果。材料和方法:这是一项前瞻性随机研究。两组在人口学、术前和术中变量方面相同。23例患者行股侧可调环固定,20例行固定环固定。4例患者失访。临床结果评估采用国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)评分、Lysholm评分和膝关节稳定性试验(Lachman试验和枢轴移位试验)。术前和术后2年对患者进行评估。结果:术后2年,I组和II组的IKDC评分分别为91.9±3.6和91.5±3.6,Lysholm评分分别为91.0±3.6和91.4±3.5;结果差异无统计学意义(p > 0.05)。ⅰ组20例(87%)、ⅱ组17例(85%)Lachman试验阴性(p = 0.8)。I组22例(95.7%)、II组19例(95%)枢轴移位检验呈阴性(p = 0.9)。结论:采用固定袢和可调袢悬吊装置重建前交叉韧带具有相同和满意的临床效果。证据等级:1;
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A prospective randomized study of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with adjustable- versus fixed-loop device for femoral side fixation.

A prospective randomized study of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with adjustable- versus fixed-loop device for femoral side fixation.

Purpose: Suspensory devices are extensively used in the management of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear. They include fixed- and adjustable-loop devices. There are only a few studies comparing the efficacy of these two devices in the available literature. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes between the adjustable-loop device (group I) and fixed-loop device (group II).

Materials and methods: This was a prospective randomized study. Both groups were equivalent in demographic, preoperative, and intraoperative variables. Twenty-three patients underwent femoral side graft fixation with adjustable-loop and 20 with fixed-loop devices. Four patients were lost to follow-up. Assessment of clinical outcome was done with International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm score, and knee stability tests (Lachman test and pivot shift test). Patient evaluation was performed preoperatively and finally postoperatively 2 years after surgery.

Results: Postoperative IKDC scores of group I and II were 91.9 ± 3.6 and 91.5 ± 3.6, respectively, and Lysholm scores were 91.0 ± 3.6 and 91.4 ± 3.5, respectively, after 2 years; however, the difference in the outcomes was statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). Twenty patients (87%) in group I and 17 patients (85%) in group II had a negative Lachman test (p = 0.8). Twenty-two patients (95.7%) in group I and 19 patients (95%) in group II had a negative pivot shift test (p = 0.9).

Conclusion: ACL reconstruction with fixed- and adjustable-loop suspensory devices for graft fixation gives equivalent and satisfactory clinical results.

Level of evidence: 1.

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
CiteScore
3.40
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信