A Prospective Randomized Study Comparing Arthroscopic Single-Bundle and Double-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions Preserving Remnant Fibers

被引:81
|
作者
Yoon, Kyoung Ho [1 ]
Bae, Dae Kyung [1 ]
Song, Sang Jun [1 ]
Cho, Hyung Jun [1 ]
Lee, Jung Hwan [1 ]
机构
[1] Kyung Hee Univ, Sch Med, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Seoul, South Korea
来源
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE | 2011年 / 39卷 / 03期
关键词
knee; posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; single bundle; double bundle; remnant fibers; 2-YEAR FOLLOW-UP; IN-VITRO; HAMSTRING AUTOGRAFT; GRAFT PLACEMENT; MINIMUM; AUGMENTATION; ALLOGRAFT; INJURIES; OUTCOMES; TENSION;
D O I
10.1177/0363546510382206
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Several controversies exist regarding the superiority of double-bundle (DB) posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction versus single-bundle (SB) reconstruction, although DB reconstruction has been shown to restore the intact knee kinematics more closely than SB reconstruction. Hypothesis: Double-bundle PCL reconstruction will present better results than SB reconstruction in postoperative outcomes. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: The authors prospectively analyzed 25 cases of SB reconstruction and 28 cases of DB reconstruction using Achilles tendon allograft with a minimum 2-year follow-up. They compared preoperative and postoperative range of motion, posterior stability by posterior stress radiography, Tegner activity score, Lysholm score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation form and knee examination form between the 2 groups. Results: There was no difference in range of motion, Tegner activity score, Lysholm score, and IKDC subjective knee evaluation form between the 2 groups at last follow-up. The side-to-side difference in posterior translation significantly improved in both groups. There was no preoperative difference in posterior instability between the groups but a significant difference at last follow-up. On the IKDC knee examination form, the DB reconstruction group presented better results in grade distribution. Conclusion: The DB reconstruction for PCL ruptures using the Achilles allograft showed better results in posterior stability and IKDC knee examination form than the SB reconstruction did. Although the difference of 1.4 mm in posterior stability was statistically significant, it is unclear that DB reconstruction is definitely superior to SB reconstruction clinically and functionally because there was no difference in the subjective scores.
引用
收藏
页码:474 / 480
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Biomechanical studies of double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions
    Markolf, Keith L.
    Feeley, Brian T.
    Jackson, Steven R.
    McAllister, David R.
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2006, 88A (08): : 1788 - 1794
  • [22] Second-look arthroscopic evaluation of the articular cartilage after primary single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions
    Wang Hai-jun
    Ao Ying-fang
    Chen Lian-xu
    Gong Xi
    Wang Yong-jian
    Ma Yong
    Leung Kevin Kar Ming
    Yu Jia-kuo
    CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2011, 124 (21) : 3551 - 3555
  • [23] Outcome of Arthroscopic Single-Bundle Versus Double-Bundle Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament: A Preliminary 2-Year Prospective Study
    Park, Se-Jin
    Jung, Young-Bok
    Jung, Hwa-Jae
    Jung, Ho-Joong
    Shin, Hun Kyu
    Kim, Eugene
    Song, Kwang-Sup
    Kim, Gwang-Sin
    Cheon, Hye-Young
    Kim, Seonwoo
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2010, 26 (05): : 630 - 636
  • [24] A comparative analysis of arthroscopic double-bundle versus single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring tendon autograft
    Vineet Jain
    Ankit Goyal
    Mukul Mohindra
    Rahul Kumar
    Deepak Joshi
    Deepak Chaudhary
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 2016, 136 : 1555 - 1561
  • [25] Double-Bundle Versus Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction A Prospective Randomized Study With 10-Year Results
    Jarvela, Sally
    Kiekara, Tommi
    Suomalainen, Piia
    Jarvela, Timo
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2017, 45 (11): : 2578 - 2585
  • [26] Double-Bundle Versus Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction A Prospective Randomized Study With 5-Year Results
    Suomalainen, Piia
    Jarvela, Timo
    Paakkala, Antti
    Kannus, Pekka
    Jarvinen, Markku
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2012, 40 (07): : 1511 - 1518
  • [27] Prospective Randomized Study of Objective and Subjective Clinical Results Between Double-Bundle and Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
    Sasaki, Shizuka
    Tsuda, Eiichi
    Hiraga, Yasuharu
    Yamamoto, Yuji
    Maeda, Shugo
    Sasaki, Eiji
    Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2016, 44 (04): : 855 - 864
  • [28] A prospective comparison of double- and single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions
    Gudas, Rimtautas
    Smailys, Alfredas
    Vostrugina, Kristina
    Tamosiunas, Ramunas
    Simonaitis, Donatas
    Kalesinskas, Romas Jonas
    MEDICINA-LITHUANIA, 2008, 44 (02): : 110 - 118
  • [29] Deterioration of Stress Distribution Due to Tunnel Creation in Single-Bundle and Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions
    Yao, Jie
    Wen, ChunYi
    Cheung, Jason Tak-Man
    Zhang, Ming
    Hu, Yong
    Yan, Chunhoi
    Chiu, Kwong-Yuen Peter
    Lu, William Weijia
    Fan, Yubo
    ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 2012, 40 (07) : 1554 - 1567
  • [30] Deterioration of Stress Distribution Due to Tunnel Creation in Single-Bundle and Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions
    Jie Yao
    ChunYi Wen
    Jason Tak-Man Cheung
    Ming Zhang
    Yong Hu
    Chunhoi Yan
    Kwong-Yuen Peter Chiu
    William Weijia Lu
    Yubo Fan
    Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 2012, 40 : 1554 - 1567