MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: [Comparative study of I.D.E.A.L. technique and transtibial technique in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction].
Author: Wang F, Wang G, Li Y, Li H, Shi Q, Li L.
Journal: Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2024 Aug 15; 38(8):987-994. PubMed ID: 39175322.
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of I.D.E.A.L technique and transtibial (TT) technique in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. METHODS: A clinical data of 60 patients with ACL injury, who were admitted and met the selection criteria between January 2020 and September 2022, was retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with autologous tendon. During operation, the femoral tunnel was prepared by using I.D.E.A.L technique in 30 cases (I.D.E.A.L group) and using TT technique in 30 cases (TT group). There was no significant difference in baseline data such as age, gender, body mass index, cause of injury, injured side, interval from injury to operation, constituent ratio of combined cartilage and meniscus injury, and preoperative Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, anterior tibial translation difference, and Blumensaat angle between the two groups ( P>0.05). The length of hospital stay and the occurrence of early and late complications were recorded. During follow-up, the Lysholm score, IKDC score, and VAS score were used to evaluate knee joint function and pain degree, and the anterior tibial translation difference was measured. MRI reexamination was performed to observe the healing of the graft, and the signal to noise quotient (SNQ) values of the femoral end, middle section, and tibial end of the graft, as well as the Blumensaat angle of the knee joint were measured. The differences in tibial anterior translation difference and Blumensaat angle before and after operation (change values) were calculated and compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The incisions in both groups healed by first intention after operation, and there was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay between the two groups ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12-18 months, with an average of 14.9 months. The Lysholm score and IKDC score of the knee joint in both groups after operation increased when compared with those before operation, and the VAS score decreased. Compared to preoperative scores, except for the VAS score of the TT group at 1 week after operation ( P>0.05), there were significant differences in all scores at different time points postoperatively in the two groups ( P<0.05). The above scores in both groups showed a further improvement trend with the prolongation of time after operation. There were significant differences in Lysholm score and VAS score among 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after operation in the two groups ( P<0.05). The IKDC score of both groups at 1 month after operation was significantly different from that at 1 week after operation ( P<0.05). At 1 week after operation, the Lysholm score and IKDC score in the I.D.E.A.L group were significantly higher than those in the TT group ( P<0.05), and the VAS score was significantly lower ( P<0.05); there was no significant difference between the two groups at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after operation ( P>0.05). At 12 months after operation, the anterior tibial translation differences in both groups were significantly lower than those before operation ( P<0.05); and the change value in the I.D.E.A.L group was significantly higher than that in the TT group ( P<0.05). The incidences of early and late complications in the I.D.E.A.L group were significantly lower than those in the TT group ( P<0.05). At 12 months after operation, MRI examination showed that the grafts of the knee joint in both groups survived well, and the Blumensaat angles of both groups were significantly smaller than those before operation ( P<0.05). The change value of the Blumensaat angle in the I.D.E.A.L group was significantly higher than that in the TT group ( P<0.05). The SNQ values of the femoral end, middle section, and tibial end of the graft in the I.D.E.A.L group were significantly higher than those in the TT group ( P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The early effectiveness of ACL reconstruction by using the I.D.E.A.L technique is better, the knee joint is more stable, and the incidence of postoperative complication is lower. However, the maturity of the graft after reconstruction using the TT technique is higher. 目的: 比较I.D.E.A.L技术与经胫骨隧道（transtibial，TT）技术重建前交叉韧带（anterior cruciate ligament，ACL）的疗效。. 方法: 回顾分析2020年1月—2022年9月收治且符合选择标准的60例ACL损伤患者临床资料。患者均接受关节镜下自体肌腱重建ACL，术中股骨隧道定位采用I.D.E.A.L技术30例（I.D.E.A.L组）、TT技术30例（TT组）。两组患者年龄、性别、身体质量指数、致伤原因、损伤侧别、受伤至手术时间、合并软骨及半月板损伤构成比以及术前Lysholm评分、国际膝关节文献委员会（IKDC）评分、疼痛视觉模拟评分（VAS）、胫骨前移差值、Blumensaat角等基线资料比较，差异均无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。记录住院时间、术后早/远期并发症发生情况，采用Lysholm评分、IKDC评分及VAS评分评价膝关节功能及疼痛程度，测量胫骨前移差值；MRI复查观察移植物愈合情况，并测量移植物股骨端、中段、胫骨端信噪比（signal to noise quotien，SNQ）值，以及膝关节Blumensaat角。计算胫骨前移差值以及Blumensaat角的手术前后差值（变化值）进行组间比较。. 结果: 术后两组切口均Ⅰ期愈合，住院时间组间差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。患者均获随访，随访时间12～18个月，平均14.9个月。术后两组膝关节Lysholm评分、IKDC评分均较术前增加，VAS评分降低，其中TT组术后1周VAS评分与术前差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05），其余评分两组组内与术前差异均有统计学意义（ P<0.05）。术后随时间延长，两组上述评分均呈进一步改善趋势；Lysholm评分、VAS评分术后1周及1、3、6、12个月间差异均有统计学意义（ P<0.05），IKDC评分仅术后1个月与术后1周差异有统计学意义（ P<0.05）。术后1周I.D.E.A.L组膝关节Lysholm评分、IKDC评分高于TT组、VAS评分更低，差异均有统计学意义（ P<0.05）；1、3、6、12个月两组间差异均无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。术后12个月，两组胫骨前移差值均较术前降低（ P<0.05）；且I.D.E.A.L组变化值高于TT组，差异有统计学意义（ P<0.05）。 I.D.E.A.L组术后早、远期并发症发生率均低于TT组（ P<0.05）。术后12个月MRI检查示两组膝关节移植物均生存良好，Blumensaat角均较术前降低（ P<0.05），且I.D.E.A.L组Blumensaat角变化值以及移植物股骨端、中段、胫骨端SNQ值均高于TT组（ P<0.05）。. 结论: 采用I.D.E.A.L技术重建ACL术后早期疗效更好，膝关节稳定性更高，术后并发症率更低；但采用TT技术重建术后移植物成熟度更高。.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]