Tightropeversus Endobutton in the reconstruction of the cruciate ligament
10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2016.11.015
- VernacularTitle:Tightrope与Endobutton应用在交叉韧带重建中的效果比较
- Author:
Lingli YUAN
;
Bin XU
;
Shaowei JIANG
;
Jun TU
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Anterior Cruciate Ligament;
Internal Fixators;
Tissue Engineering
- From:
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
2016;20(11):1616-1622
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND:Because of its advantages, Endobutton has been widely used in clinic. Currently, its shortcomings are increasingly recognized. Tightrope that overcomes the shortcomings of Endobutton has been gradualy accepted by a doctor skiled in sports injuries.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze and compare the differences in the effects of Tightrope and Endobutton in the reconstruction of the cruciate ligament.
METHODS:Totaly 60 cases of anterior cruciate ligament rupture were selected and subjected to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction under arthroscopy, of which 30 cases were randomly assigned to reconstruction by Endobutton device and 30 cases underwent reconstruction by Tightrope device. Al operations were performed by the same surgeon. Al patients were subjected to regular functional exercise and were folowed up regularly after operation. Effects of Tightrope and Endobutton in the cruciate ligament reconstruction were evaluated by comparing various indexes in the two groups.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:Compared to the Endobutton fixation system, the Tightrope fixation system could shorten the operation time, reduce the length of tendon incision, and decrease the loss of bone mass in the femoral bone tunnel. There were no significant differences in the maximum knee flexion, knee joint score and Tegner movement level score between the two groups at 3 and 6 months after operation. These findings indicate that the Tightrope fixation system is superior to the Endobutton fixation system, because it is more simple and convenient to operate and has less bone loss. However, their clinical efficacy has no difference after 6 months.
