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
  • [31] Anterior-Posterior and Rotatory Stability of Single and Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions
    Markolf, Keith L.
    Park, Samuel
    Jackson, Steven R.
    McAllister, David R.
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2009, 91A (01): : 107 - 118
  • [32] Double-Bundle Versus Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Patients With Significant Passive Anterior Tibial Subluxation
    Lin, Lin
    Wang, Haijun
    Wang, Yongjian
    Wang, Jian
    Liu, Yang
    Yu, Jiakuo
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2022, 50 (04): : 943 - 950
  • [33] Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Was Superior to Conventional Single-Bundle Reconstruction
    Marx, Robert G.
    JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2013, 95A (04): : 365 - 365
  • [34] Comparison of double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and single-bundle reconstruction with remnant pull-out suture
    Kim, Seong Hwan
    Jung, Young Bok
    Song, Min Ku
    Lee, Sang Hak
    Jung, Ho Joong
    Lee, Han Jun
    Jung, Hyoung Seok
    Siti, Hawa-Tahir
    KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2014, 22 (09) : 2085 - 2093
  • [35] Single-Bundle Versus Double-Bundle Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Comparison of Long-Term Functional Outcomes
    Anandan, Vicknesh
    Goh, Teik Chiang
    Zamri, Kamarul Syariza
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2020, 12 (12)
  • [36] Cost Analysis of Converting From Single-Bundle to Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
    Brophy, Robert H.
    Wright, Rick W.
    Matava, Matthew J.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2009, 37 (04): : 683 - 687
  • [37] Double bundle versus single bundle reconstruction in the treatment of posterior cruciate ligament injury: A prospective comparative study
    Xu, Mai
    Zhang, Qiliang
    Dai, Shiyou
    Teng, Xueren
    Liu, Yuxin
    Ma, Zhenhua
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS, 2019, 53 (02) : 297 - 303
  • [38] Biomechanical comparison of single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis
    Oh, Jin-Young
    Kim, Kun-Tae
    Park, Young-Jin
    Won, Hee-Chan
    Yoo, Jun-Il
    Moon, Dong-Kyu
    Cho, Sung-Hee
    Hwang, Sun-Chul
    KNEE SURGERY & RELATED RESEARCH, 2020, 32 (01)
  • [39] 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
  • [40] Arthroscopic anatomical double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A prospective longitudinal study
    Devgan, Ashish
    Singh, Amanpreet
    Gogna, Paritosh
    Singla, Rohit
    Magu, Narender Kumar
    Mukhopadhyay, Reetadyuti
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS, 2015, 49 (02) : 136 - 142