后交叉韧带重建:结果与前交叉韧带重建相似吗?

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Marcos Barbieri Mestriner, Fábio Eidi Hirosse, Nayra Deise Dos Anjos Rabelo, Alfredo Dos Santos Netto, Victor Marques DE Oliveira, Ricardo DE Paula Leite Cury
{"title":"后交叉韧带重建:结果与前交叉韧带重建相似吗?","authors":"Marcos Barbieri Mestriner,&nbsp;Fábio Eidi Hirosse,&nbsp;Nayra Deise Dos Anjos Rabelo,&nbsp;Alfredo Dos Santos Netto,&nbsp;Victor Marques DE Oliveira,&nbsp;Ricardo DE Paula Leite Cury","doi":"10.1590/1413-785220233102e260740","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To report and compare the results of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 42 patients were retrospectively evaluated, 20 with isolated PCL injuries (group 1) and 22 with isolated ACL ones (group 2) who were subjected to arthroscopic ligament reconstruction with autologous grafts and followed up for at least two years. To evaluate the results in group 1, objective IKDC and Lysholm scores, posterior drawer tests, and evaluations by a KT-1000 arthrometer were used, whereas for group 2, subjective IKDC and Lysholm score and the Lachman test were employed. To compare groups, objective IKDC and Lysholm scores and assessment via a KT-1000 arthrometer were considered.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intragroup analysis showed improved results for all variables (p < 0.001) in both groups. Comparisons between groups showed a significant difference in objective IKDC scores (p < 0.001), but no such disparities for Lysholm ones (p = 0.052), clinical tests (p = 0.058) or evaluation by KT-1000 (p = 0.129).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Treatment restored knee stability and function in both groups. Comparisons between groups showed that PCL reconstructions had inferior results than ACL ones according to patients' objective IKDC scores. <b><i>Level of Evidence II, Retrospective Study.</i></b></p>","PeriodicalId":55563,"journal":{"name":"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10158965/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"POSTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION: ARE THE RESULTS SIMILAR TO ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION?\",\"authors\":\"Marcos Barbieri Mestriner,&nbsp;Fábio Eidi Hirosse,&nbsp;Nayra Deise Dos Anjos Rabelo,&nbsp;Alfredo Dos Santos Netto,&nbsp;Victor Marques DE Oliveira,&nbsp;Ricardo DE Paula Leite Cury\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/1413-785220233102e260740\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To report and compare the results of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 42 patients were retrospectively evaluated, 20 with isolated PCL injuries (group 1) and 22 with isolated ACL ones (group 2) who were subjected to arthroscopic ligament reconstruction with autologous grafts and followed up for at least two years. To evaluate the results in group 1, objective IKDC and Lysholm scores, posterior drawer tests, and evaluations by a KT-1000 arthrometer were used, whereas for group 2, subjective IKDC and Lysholm score and the Lachman test were employed. To compare groups, objective IKDC and Lysholm scores and assessment via a KT-1000 arthrometer were considered.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intragroup analysis showed improved results for all variables (p < 0.001) in both groups. Comparisons between groups showed a significant difference in objective IKDC scores (p < 0.001), but no such disparities for Lysholm ones (p = 0.052), clinical tests (p = 0.058) or evaluation by KT-1000 (p = 0.129).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Treatment restored knee stability and function in both groups. Comparisons between groups showed that PCL reconstructions had inferior results than ACL ones according to patients' objective IKDC scores. <b><i>Level of Evidence II, Retrospective Study.</i></b></p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55563,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10158965/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-785220233102e260740\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-785220233102e260740","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:报道和比较后交叉韧带(PCL)和前交叉韧带(ACL)重建的结果。方法:回顾性分析42例患者,其中分离性前交叉韧带损伤20例(1组),分离性前交叉韧带损伤22例(2组),均行关节镜下自体韧带重建,随访至少2年。为了评估第1组的结果,采用客观IKDC和Lysholm评分、后抽屉测试和KT-1000关节计评估,而第2组采用主观IKDC和Lysholm评分和Lachman测试。为了比较各组,考虑客观的IKDC和Lysholm评分以及通过KT-1000关节计进行的评估。结果:组内分析显示两组所有变量的结果均有改善(p < 0.001)。两组间比较显示客观IKDC评分有显著差异(p < 0.001),但Lysholm评分(p = 0.052)、临床试验(p = 0.058)和KT-1000评分(p = 0.129)无显著差异。结论:治疗可恢复两组患者的膝关节稳定性和功能。组间比较显示,根据患者客观IKDC评分,PCL重建效果不如ACL重建。证据水平II,回顾性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
POSTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION: ARE THE RESULTS SIMILAR TO ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION?

Objective: To report and compare the results of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions.

Methods: In total, 42 patients were retrospectively evaluated, 20 with isolated PCL injuries (group 1) and 22 with isolated ACL ones (group 2) who were subjected to arthroscopic ligament reconstruction with autologous grafts and followed up for at least two years. To evaluate the results in group 1, objective IKDC and Lysholm scores, posterior drawer tests, and evaluations by a KT-1000 arthrometer were used, whereas for group 2, subjective IKDC and Lysholm score and the Lachman test were employed. To compare groups, objective IKDC and Lysholm scores and assessment via a KT-1000 arthrometer were considered.

Results: Intragroup analysis showed improved results for all variables (p < 0.001) in both groups. Comparisons between groups showed a significant difference in objective IKDC scores (p < 0.001), but no such disparities for Lysholm ones (p = 0.052), clinical tests (p = 0.058) or evaluation by KT-1000 (p = 0.129).

Conclusion: Treatment restored knee stability and function in both groups. Comparisons between groups showed that PCL reconstructions had inferior results than ACL ones according to patients' objective IKDC scores. Level of Evidence II, Retrospective Study.

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
0.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
67
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: A Revista Acta Ortopédica Brasileira, órgão oficial do Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (DOT/FMUSP), é publicada bimestralmente em seis edições ao ano (jan/fev, mar/abr, maio/jun, jul/ago, set/out e nov/dez) com versão em inglês disponível nos principais indexadores nacionais e internacionais e instituições de ensino do Brasil. Sendo hoje reconhecidamente uma importante contribuição para os especialistas da área com sua seriedade e árduo trabalho para as indexações já conquistadas.
×
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