| Objective:To reviewed the clinical effects of the LARS artificial ligament and the autologous ST/G tendon for the reconstruction of PCL.Compared the knee joint function of the two groups and evaluated the mid-long term effects,providing evidence-based medical evidence for the clinical application of artificial ligaments.Methods:From November 2006 to November 2012,23 patients with PCL injuries were treated in the Department of orthopedics,Qilu Hospital of Shandong University,including 21 males and 2 females,with an average age of 35.43 + 10.55 years(17-54 years old).Patients were divided into LARS artificial ligament group and ST/G tendon group according to different graft.10 cases in LARS group and 13 in ST/G group.The average age of LARS group was 32.80 + 10.08 years(17-54 years),and the ST/G group was 37.46 + 10.46 years(20-53 years).Preoperative physical examination and imaging findings all support PCL injuries diagnosis.All patients were graded on Lysholm,IKDC,Tegner knee motion function before operation,and followed up for 6 months,12 months,36 months,60 months and more,and three knee joint function scores were also carried out.The mean follow-up time was 96.26 +22.77 months(60-132 months).The patients were recorded on crutches of ground time,abduction and walking time,and resumed daily movement time.The patients were asked whether the patients had postoperative infection,synovitis,joint vascular nerve injury,joint stiffness,and rupture of reconstruction ligament.According to the Lysholm score,the postoperative effects were graded,and the excellent and good rate after operation was grouped according to the satisfactory rate of operation.Result:10 patients with LARS group and 13 patients with autologous ST/G tendon group were all followed up 6,12,36 months and 60 months after operation.The average follow-up time in LARS group was 98.60 + 17 months(70-124 months).The ST/G tendon group was 94.46 + 26.22 months(60-132 months).There was no significant difference between the two groups of Lysholm,IKDC and Tegner scores before operation(P>0.05);Lysholm,IKDC and Tegner scores in 6 months and 12 months after the operation of LARS group were superior to those in the ST/G group(P<0.05),and 36 months and above after operation showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups(P>0.05).The satisfaction rate of LARS group in 6 months and 12 months was significantly higher than that in group ST/G group at the same time,but the results of two groups were similar at 36 months,60 months and above.The excellent and good rate of operation was similar between the two groups at the last follow-up.1 patient in ST/G group had incidental knee pain and ringing.All patients had no complications such as postoperative infection,synovitis,joint vascular nerve injury,joint stiffness,reconstruction of ligament rupture.Conclusion:In terms of postoperative joint function recovery,the clinical effect of LARS artificial ligament reconstruction after PCL is satisfactory.Compared with other graft materials,the LARS ligament has the advantages of small trauma,no damage to its own structure,less postoperative complications and early functional exercise,so the LARS ligament is an ideal transplant material for those who want to recover the knee function as soon as possible.According to the long-term follow-up results,there is no significant difference between two group,so the selection of the LARS artificial ligament as a graft should be carefully measured in combination with the actual situation. |
PDF Full Text Request