A Clinical and Radiographic Comparison of Anteromedial and Anterolateral Trans-tibial PCL Reconstruction.
10.4055/jkoa.2011.46.5.419
- Author:
Dong Chul LEE
1
;
Oog Jin SHON
;
Chul Hyun PARK
;
Young Jin KO
Author Information
1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yeungnam University Hospital, Daegu, Korea. ossoj@med.yu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
anteromedial;
anterolateral;
tibia tunnel;
PCL reconstruction
- MeSH:
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Humulus;
Knee;
Leg;
Retrospective Studies;
Rupture
- From:The Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association
2011;46(5):419-425
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this clinical study was to compare the outcomes of anteromedial and anterolateral trans-tibial approachs in arthroscopic PCL reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2004 and December 2007, 40 patients (40 knees, which underwent PCL reconstruction, with a follow-up of more than 1.6 years) were surveyed in the areas of clinical and radiographic results and individual satisfaction. Forty knees with isolated PCL rupture were reviewed retrospectively. They were divided into two groups of equal size according to the transtibial approach used: anteromedial or anterolateral. The evaluation parameters included activities and functional outcomes using the Lysholm and Tegner score, single leg hop test and individual satisfaction using the IKDC score. Radiographic results were analyzed using the posterior drawer radiography with manual methods and the Telos device, and the changes in the tibial tunnel diameter were measured. RESULTS: Both groups showed improvements in the Lysholm and Tegner score. Both groups showed improvements in the single leg hop test. As far as individual satisfaction evaluation using the IKDC score was concerned, 85% of cases in both groups improved to nearly normal. Both groups showed improvements on the posterior drawer radiography. Tibial tunnel enlargement was also seen. The results of both groups demonstrated no statistically significant difference. CONCLUSION: Both groups showed improvements in the clinical and radiographic results and in the individual satisfaction score. However, results of both groups demonstrated no statistically significant difference. Therefore, the long term results need to be studied.
