保留后交叉韧带与牺牲后交叉韧带的全膝关节置换术的疗效比较

Mohit Issrani, Harshad Kotecha, Dhruv N Shah, Alfven Vieira, Shahish Surme, Laksh Agrawal
{"title":"保留后交叉韧带与牺牲后交叉韧带的全膝关节置换术的疗效比较","authors":"Mohit Issrani, Harshad Kotecha, Dhruv N Shah, Alfven Vieira, Shahish Surme, Laksh Agrawal","doi":"10.4103/jodp.jodp_40_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Although being debated for many years, the superiority of either posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and posterior-stabilized (PS) TKA remains controversial. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective study on 40 knee replacements which were undertaken at our hospital between July of 2020 and July of 2021 out of which in 30 patients the cruciate ligament was sacrificed and the posterior cruciate ligament was retained in 10 of the knees undergoing surgery. The inclusion criteria were patients of age more than 50 years, with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis and Kellgren and Lawrence Grade of 3 and 4. The posterior cruciate ligament was retained if it was structurally intact, fixed flexion deformity of <15° a varus or valgus deformity of <10°. The overall average knee score was 84.9 for posterior cruciate-sacrificing and 74.6 for the CR patients as compared to the preoperative score of 43.9 and 37.6. Functional Knee Score was 97.87 and 98.4 for the CS and CR groups, respectively. The preoperative Functional Knee Score was 37.1 and 37.8 in these groups. The WOMAC Score also showed a marked improvement from 67.7 to 24.6 and 27.4 for CS and CR, respectively. Results and Conclusions: Analyzing the total knee scores, the average Knee Society Score for the PS group was 84.90 and that of the CR group was 74.60 and statistical analysis revealed a significant difference in the P value in favor of cruciate-sacrificing prosthesis, signifying that cruciate-sacrificing prosthesis has better functional outcome. The WOMAC Score also showed a marked improvement. In the CS group, it was 24.6, and in the CR group, it was 27.4. Statistical analysis showed a highly significant difference in favor of cruciate-sacrificing prosthesis.","PeriodicalId":34809,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Diseases and Traumatology","volume":"5 1","pages":"61 - 65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the functional outcome of posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior cruciate-sacrificing total knee arthroplasty\",\"authors\":\"Mohit Issrani, Harshad Kotecha, Dhruv N Shah, Alfven Vieira, Shahish Surme, Laksh Agrawal\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/jodp.jodp_40_21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Although being debated for many years, the superiority of either posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and posterior-stabilized (PS) TKA remains controversial. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective study on 40 knee replacements which were undertaken at our hospital between July of 2020 and July of 2021 out of which in 30 patients the cruciate ligament was sacrificed and the posterior cruciate ligament was retained in 10 of the knees undergoing surgery. The inclusion criteria were patients of age more than 50 years, with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis and Kellgren and Lawrence Grade of 3 and 4. The posterior cruciate ligament was retained if it was structurally intact, fixed flexion deformity of <15° a varus or valgus deformity of <10°. The overall average knee score was 84.9 for posterior cruciate-sacrificing and 74.6 for the CR patients as compared to the preoperative score of 43.9 and 37.6. Functional Knee Score was 97.87 and 98.4 for the CS and CR groups, respectively. The preoperative Functional Knee Score was 37.1 and 37.8 in these groups. The WOMAC Score also showed a marked improvement from 67.7 to 24.6 and 27.4 for CS and CR, respectively. Results and Conclusions: Analyzing the total knee scores, the average Knee Society Score for the PS group was 84.90 and that of the CR group was 74.60 and statistical analysis revealed a significant difference in the P value in favor of cruciate-sacrificing prosthesis, signifying that cruciate-sacrificing prosthesis has better functional outcome. The WOMAC Score also showed a marked improvement. In the CS group, it was 24.6, and in the CR group, it was 27.4. Statistical analysis showed a highly significant difference in favor of cruciate-sacrificing prosthesis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34809,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic Diseases and Traumatology\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"61 - 65\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic Diseases and Traumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/jodp.jodp_40_21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Diseases and Traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jodp.jodp_40_21","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:尽管争论了多年,但后交叉韧带保留(CR)全膝关节置换术(TKA)和后稳定(PS)TKA的优越性仍然存在争议。材料和方法:我们对2020年7月至2021年7月在我院进行的40例膝关节置换术进行了前瞻性研究,其中30例患者牺牲了交叉韧带,10例接受手术的膝关节保留了后交叉韧带。纳入标准为年龄超过50岁、患有骨关节炎和类风湿性关节炎以及Kellgren和Lawrence 3级和4级的患者。如果后交叉韧带结构完整,固定屈曲畸形<15°a内翻或外翻畸形<10°,则可保留后交叉韧带。与术前43.9分和37.6分相比,后交叉韧带牺牲患者的总平均膝关节得分为84.9分,CR患者为74.6分。CS组和CR组的膝关节功能评分分别为97.87和98.4。这些组术前膝关节功能评分分别为37.1和37.8。CS和CR的WOMAC评分也分别从67.7显著提高到24.6和27.4。结果和结论:分析膝关节总分,PS组和CR组的平均膝关节社会评分分别为84.90和74.60。统计分析显示,P值有利于牺牲交叉韧带假体,表明牺牲交叉韧带假肢具有更好的功能结果。WOMAC评分也显示出明显的改善。CS组为24.6,CR组为27.4。统计分析显示,有利于牺牲交叉韧带假体的差异非常显著。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of the functional outcome of posterior cruciate-retaining versus posterior cruciate-sacrificing total knee arthroplasty
Background: Although being debated for many years, the superiority of either posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and posterior-stabilized (PS) TKA remains controversial. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective study on 40 knee replacements which were undertaken at our hospital between July of 2020 and July of 2021 out of which in 30 patients the cruciate ligament was sacrificed and the posterior cruciate ligament was retained in 10 of the knees undergoing surgery. The inclusion criteria were patients of age more than 50 years, with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis and Kellgren and Lawrence Grade of 3 and 4. The posterior cruciate ligament was retained if it was structurally intact, fixed flexion deformity of <15° a varus or valgus deformity of <10°. The overall average knee score was 84.9 for posterior cruciate-sacrificing and 74.6 for the CR patients as compared to the preoperative score of 43.9 and 37.6. Functional Knee Score was 97.87 and 98.4 for the CS and CR groups, respectively. The preoperative Functional Knee Score was 37.1 and 37.8 in these groups. The WOMAC Score also showed a marked improvement from 67.7 to 24.6 and 27.4 for CS and CR, respectively. Results and Conclusions: Analyzing the total knee scores, the average Knee Society Score for the PS group was 84.90 and that of the CR group was 74.60 and statistical analysis revealed a significant difference in the P value in favor of cruciate-sacrificing prosthesis, signifying that cruciate-sacrificing prosthesis has better functional outcome. The WOMAC Score also showed a marked improvement. In the CS group, it was 24.6, and in the CR group, it was 27.4. Statistical analysis showed a highly significant difference in favor of cruciate-sacrificing prosthesis.
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
26
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
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