37 160

Cited 21 times in

Clinical comparison of conventional and remnant-preserving transtibial single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction combined with posterolateral corner reconstruction

Authors
 Sung-Jae Kim ; Sung-Hwan Kim ; Ji-Young Yoon ; Duck-Hyun Choi ; Byoung-Yoon Hwang ; Yong-Min Chun 
Citation
 American Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol.40(3) : 640~649, 2012 
Journal Title
 American Journal of Sports Medicine 
ISSN
 0363-5465 
Issue Date
2012
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite persistent continuity of the attenuated posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) in most PCL insufficient knees, few reconstruction techniques that preserve the PCL remnant have been presented. Furthermore, data regarding the clinical outcomes of these approaches are even more limited, and the clinical validity of remnant preservation has not yet been established. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of transtibial PCL reconstructions that incorporate remnant preservation with conventional techniques (in which remnant preservation is not performed). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence 3. METHODS: The authors retrospectively evaluated 53 cases of PCL reconstruction with simultaneous posterolateral corner reconstruction. Of these, 23 were performed with a conventional approach without remnant preservation (group C), and 30 incorporated a remnant-preserving technique (group R). In all cases, the minimum follow-up period was 24 months. Each patient was evaluated using the following variables: Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity scale, return to activity, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) knee score and grade, and degree of posterior laxity on stress radiograph. RESULTS: The mean side-to-side differences in posterior tibial translation, Lysholm knee score, return to activity, and objective IKDC grade were similar between group C (4.4 ± 3.0 mm; 82.6 ± 11.0; 21.7%; A and B: 73.9%) and group R (4.1 ± 3.4 mm; 84.1 ± 10.7; 26.7%; A and B: 83.3%; P = .761, .611, .679, .755). However, the final Tegner activity scale, near-return to activity, and subjective IKDC score differed significantly between group C (3.5 ± 0.8; 43.5%; 64.5 ± 8.8) and group R (4.3 ± 1.1; 73.3%; 70.6 ± 7.9; P = .007, .028, .012). CONCLUSION: Techniques combining remnant-preserving transtibial single-bundle PCL reconstruction with posterolateral corner reconstruction resulted in somewhat better activity-related outcomes compared with those of approaches without remnant preservation. However, incorporation of remnant preservation does not appear to provide increased posterior stability or result in clinically superior outcomes versus those of techniques without remnant preservation.
URI
http://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/89455
DOI
10.1177/0363546511428068
Appears in Collections:
1. 연구논문 > 1. College of Medicine > Dept. of Orthopedic Surgery
Yonsei Authors
사서에게 알리기
  feedback
Files in This Item:
T201202199.pdfDownload
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse