Clinical efficacy of arthroscopic single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament: a retrospective study

被引:0
作者
Chen, Tian-Xin [1 ]
Yu, Mei-Qi [1 ,2 ]
Dong, Ting-Ting [1 ]
Li, Yan [1 ]
Zhang, Sheng [1 ]
Zhang, Lei [1 ]
机构
[1] China Acad Chinese Med Sci, Wangjing Hosp, Dept Sports Med, Beijing 100102, Peoples R China
[2] Beijing Univ Chinese Med, Beijing 100029, Peoples R China
关键词
Posterior cruciate ligament injury; Single-bundle reconstruction; Long-term outcome; Double-bundle reconstruction; Osteoarthritis; ALLOGRAFT; IKDC;
D O I
10.1007/s00264-024-06360-9
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
Purpose To compare the functional and clinical outcomes of knee joints in patients over a 10-year period following posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction with single-bundle versus double-bundle. Methods Patients who underwent PCL reconstruction were retrospectively analyzed. Based on the surgical approach, they were divided into the single-bundle reconstruction group and the double-bundle reconstruction group. Preoperative and postoperative Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKCD) score, and Tegner activity score were evaluated, and the stability of the joints was assessed using KT-2000 arthrometer. Radiographs were taken at the final follow-up to evaluate the progression of osteoarthritis. Results A total of 61 patients were included in the analysis: 26 in the double-bundle group and 35 in the single-bundle group. Baseline data were comparable between the two groups (P > 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in preoperative Lysholm, IKDC score, and Tegner activity score. Postoperatively, these scores were significantly higher at two and ten years follow-up (P < 0.05), with no significant difference between the groups (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in side-to-side differences (SSD) at 30 degrees and 90 degrees of knee flexion preoperatively between the groups (P > 0.05). Postoperatively, SSD decreased significantly at the two year and ten year follow-up (P < 0.05), with no significant difference between the groups (P > 0.05). For osteoarthritis progression, there were four cases of Kellgren-Lawrence grade >= II in the single-bundle group and three cases in the double-bundle group, with no significant difference in the progression of osteoarthritis between the groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion Both single-bundle and double-bundle reconstructions for PCL result in good joint stability and mobility, with similar progression of osteoarthritis in long-term follow-up. Level of evidence Level III.
引用
收藏
页码:93 / 100
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] The Effect of Central Anatomical Single-Bundle versus Anatomical Double-Bundle Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament on Knee Stability. A Clinical Study
    Komzak, M.
    Hart, R.
    Smid, P.
    Puskeiler, M.
    ACTA CHIRURGIAE ORTHOPAEDICAE ET TRAUMATOLOGIAE CECHOSLOVACA, 2014, 81 (04) : 276 - 280
  • [12] Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructionA comparative study with propensity score matching
    Jeong-Ku Ha
    Dhong-Won Lee
    Jin-Goo Kim
    Indian Journal of Orthopaedics, 2016, 50 : 505 - 511
  • [14] Control of laxity in knees with combined posterior cruciate ligament and posterolateral corner deficiency - Comparison of single-bundle versus double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction combined with modified Larson posterolateral corner reconstruction
    Apsingi, Sunil
    Nguyen, Trung
    Bull, Anthony M. J.
    Unwin, Andrew
    Deehan, David J.
    Amis, Andrew A.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2008, 36 (03) : 487 - 494
  • [15] Double-Bundle Technique - Anatomic Reconstruction of the Posterior Cruciate Ligament
    Rauch, Alexander C.
    Schoettle, Philip B.
    Beitzel, Knut
    Imhoff, Andreas B.
    OPERATIVE ORTHOPADIE UND TRAUMATOLOGIE, 2010, 22 (04): : 387 - 401
  • [16] Comparison of Rotatory Stability After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Between Single-Bundle and Double-Bundle Techniques
    Izawa, Toshiaki
    Okazaki, Ken
    Tashiro, Yasutaka
    Matsubara, Hirokazu
    Miura, Hiromasa
    Matsuda, Shuichi
    Hashizume, Makoto
    Iwamoto, Yukihide
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2011, 39 (07) : 1470 - 1477
  • [17] Isokinetic Quadriceps and Hamstring Muscle Strength After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Comparison Between Single-bundle and Double-bundle Reconstruction
    Emily, Yip Ka-Yan
    Chan Wai-Lam
    Chester, Lie Wai-Hung
    Kevin, Wong Kwun-Hung
    Woo Siu-Bon
    Wong Wing-Cheung
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS TRAUMA AND REHABILITATION, 2013, 17 (02) : 71 - 76
  • [18] Eight-year results of transtibial nonanatomic single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Clinical, radiologic outcomes and survivorship
    Yoon, Kyoung Ho
    Kim, Jung Suk
    Kim, Sang Jun
    Park, Moonsu
    Park, Soo Yeon
    Park, Sang Eon
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2019, 27 (02)
  • [19] A prospective randomized study of 4-strand semitendinosus tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction comparing single-bundle and double-bundle techniques
    Muneta, Takeshi
    Koga, Hideyuki
    Mochizuki, Tomoyuki
    Ju, Young-Jin
    Hara, Kenji
    Nimura, Akimoto
    Yagishita, Kazuyoshi
    Sekiya, Ichiro
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2007, 23 (06) : 618 - 628
  • [20] One stage revision single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with impacted morselized bone graft following a failed double-bundle reconstruction
    Ho Jong Ra
    Jeong Ku Ha
    Jin Goo Kim
    Do-Yon Hwang
    Indian Journal of Orthopaedics, 2017, 51 : 343 - 346