三种前交叉韧带重建技术的主观满意度和残余胫骨平移结果

Carlos Almeida-Herdoíza, Eusebio Sánchez-Pérez, Arturo Reyes-Mares, María Maldonado-Vega
{"title":"三种前交叉韧带重建技术的主观满意度和残余胫骨平移结果","authors":"Carlos Almeida-Herdoíza,&nbsp;Eusebio Sánchez-Pérez,&nbsp;Arturo Reyes-Mares,&nbsp;María Maldonado-Vega","doi":"10.1016/j.rslaot.2017.02.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>In this study, we aimed to determine if there is any difference between the subjetive satisfaction and the residual tibial traslation outcomes, of the three most common reconstruction techniques; which are conventional trans-tibial technique, anatomic tunnel technique and all inside technique.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Observational, retrospective study of eigthteen patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between 2014 and 2015. Single-bundle reconstruction with an autologous or allograft was performed in all patients. Femoral tunnel was drilled by the conventional TT technique in 6 patients, Anatomic in 6 patients and all inside in 6. Functional evaluation was performed about 6 months postoperatively. Functional evaluation included the International Knee Documentation Committee Scoring Subjetive form (IKDC) and anteroposterior stability was assessed using a arthrometer in lachman test and anterior drawer test.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The results of IKDC subjetive test and residual ligament laxity, demonstrated statistical diference between Transtibial (IKDC 70.52) vs all inside technique (IKDC 89.63) <em>(P</em>0.05).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The all inside preparation technique in the reconstruction of the ACL seems as effective as the conventional techniques in terms of subjetive satisfaction and stability in the midterm of follow up.</p><p>Level of evidence: IV.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101114,"journal":{"name":"Revista Latinoamericana de Cirugía Ortopédica","volume":"1 3","pages":"Pages 83-87"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rslaot.2017.02.007","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resultados de la satisfacción subjetiva y traslación tibial residual entre 3 técnicas de reconstrucción del ligamento cruzado anterior\",\"authors\":\"Carlos Almeida-Herdoíza,&nbsp;Eusebio Sánchez-Pérez,&nbsp;Arturo Reyes-Mares,&nbsp;María Maldonado-Vega\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rslaot.2017.02.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>In this study, we aimed to determine if there is any difference between the subjetive satisfaction and the residual tibial traslation outcomes, of the three most common reconstruction techniques; which are conventional trans-tibial technique, anatomic tunnel technique and all inside technique.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Observational, retrospective study of eigthteen patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between 2014 and 2015. Single-bundle reconstruction with an autologous or allograft was performed in all patients. Femoral tunnel was drilled by the conventional TT technique in 6 patients, Anatomic in 6 patients and all inside in 6. Functional evaluation was performed about 6 months postoperatively. Functional evaluation included the International Knee Documentation Committee Scoring Subjetive form (IKDC) and anteroposterior stability was assessed using a arthrometer in lachman test and anterior drawer test.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The results of IKDC subjetive test and residual ligament laxity, demonstrated statistical diference between Transtibial (IKDC 70.52) vs all inside technique (IKDC 89.63) <em>(P</em>0.05).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The all inside preparation technique in the reconstruction of the ACL seems as effective as the conventional techniques in terms of subjetive satisfaction and stability in the midterm of follow up.</p><p>Level of evidence: IV.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101114,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Latinoamericana de Cirugía Ortopédica\",\"volume\":\"1 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 83-87\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rslaot.2017.02.007\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Latinoamericana de Cirugía Ortopédica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444972517300098\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Latinoamericana de Cirugía Ortopédica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444972517300098","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

在本研究中,我们旨在确定三种最常见的重建技术的主观满意度和残余胫骨平移结果之间是否存在差异;包括常规经胫骨技术、解剖隧道技术和全内技术。材料与方法对2014 - 2015年间行ACL重建的18例患者进行观察性、回顾性研究。所有患者均采用自体或同种异体移植进行单束重建。6例采用常规TT技术钻取股骨隧道,6例解剖钻取,6例全内钻取。术后约6个月进行功能评估。功能评估采用国际膝关节文献委员会主观评分表(IKDC),前后位稳定性评估采用关节计lachman试验和前抽屉试验。结果经胫法(IKDC 70.52)与全内法(IKDC 89.63)的IKDC主观测试和残余韧带松弛度比较,差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论全内预备技术在前交叉韧带重建中的主观满意度和中期随访稳定性与常规技术相当。证据等级:四级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Resultados de la satisfacción subjetiva y traslación tibial residual entre 3 técnicas de reconstrucción del ligamento cruzado anterior

Purpose

In this study, we aimed to determine if there is any difference between the subjetive satisfaction and the residual tibial traslation outcomes, of the three most common reconstruction techniques; which are conventional trans-tibial technique, anatomic tunnel technique and all inside technique.

Material and methods

Observational, retrospective study of eigthteen patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between 2014 and 2015. Single-bundle reconstruction with an autologous or allograft was performed in all patients. Femoral tunnel was drilled by the conventional TT technique in 6 patients, Anatomic in 6 patients and all inside in 6. Functional evaluation was performed about 6 months postoperatively. Functional evaluation included the International Knee Documentation Committee Scoring Subjetive form (IKDC) and anteroposterior stability was assessed using a arthrometer in lachman test and anterior drawer test.

Results

The results of IKDC subjetive test and residual ligament laxity, demonstrated statistical diference between Transtibial (IKDC 70.52) vs all inside technique (IKDC 89.63) (P0.05).

Conclusion

The all inside preparation technique in the reconstruction of the ACL seems as effective as the conventional techniques in terms of subjetive satisfaction and stability in the midterm of follow up.

Level of evidence: IV.

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:481959085
Book学术官方微信