Comparison of the efficacy of posterior "S" shape incision versus medial small incision with suture anchor for treating avulsion fractures of the tibial insertion of the posterior cruciate ligament
10.3760/cma.j.cn101721-20240628-00200
- VernacularTitle:膝关节后侧“S”形切口与后内侧小切口带线锚钉治疗后交叉韧带胫骨止点撕脱骨折的效果比较
- Author:
Tiangang CHEN
1
;
Heng ZHANG
;
Shuai SONG
;
Lei ZHANG
;
Shifeng DAI
;
Kunnan XIE
Author Information
1. 河北省唐山市第二医院关节二科，唐山 063000
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Posterior cruciate ligament tibial avulsion fracture;
"S" shape incision;
Small incision;
Suture anchor
- From:
Clinical Medicine of China
2025;41(2):133-139
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare and analyze the clinical efficacy of using a posterior "S" shape incision versus a medial small incision with suture anchors in the treatment of avulsion fractures at the tibial insertion of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL).Methods:A retrospective study was conducted on clinical data from patients with PCL tibial avulsion fractures who met surgical criteria and were treated at Department of Joint 2, Tangshan Second Hospital from March 2021 to May 2023. Among those patients, there were 25 cases classified as Meyers-McKeever type Ⅱ and 41 cases as type Ⅲ. 32 patients who underwent surgery through the posterior "S" shape incision served as the control group; based on matched baseline characteristics, 34 patients who underwent surgery through the medial small incision were selected as the observation group. Both groups received fixation of the avulsion fracture with suture anchors. Surgical indicators, as well as Lysholm scores, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, range of motion (ROM) of the injured knee, the difference in posterior tibial translation between both sides (calculated by measuring the posterior translation on both sides), and the incidence of postoperative complications were collected at 1, 3, and 6 months post-surgery. Comparative analyses were conducted to evaluate postoperative functional recovery. Chi-square tests were used for categorical data comparison, and t-tests were employed for normally distributed continuous data.Results:The observation group had shorter incision lengths ((5.71±1.85) cm), less intraoperative blood loss ((74.87±20.74) mL), and shorter operation times ((48.76±6.46) min) compared to the control group ((12.45±1.52) cm, (120.29±31.12) mL, (61.14±10.23) min), and the differences were statistically significant ( t values were 16.21, 7.02, 5.92, respectively; all P<0.001). At 3 and 6 months post-surgery, the Lysholm ((79.67±3.08), (91.16±2.23) points) and IKDC scores ((84.67±5.08), (93.16±3.23) points) in the observation group were significantly higher than those ((65.29±3.84), (79.52±2.98), (79.29±4.84), (85.32±3.98) points) in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant ( t values were 16.72, 18.04, 4.40, 8.81, respectively; all P<0.001). At 3 and 6 months, the VAS scores ((2.83±0.38), (2.12±0.34) points) in the control group were significantly higher than those ((2.41±0.25), (1.73±0.49) points) in the observation group ( t values were 5.34 and 3.73 respectively, both P<0.001). At 6 months post-surgery, all fractures had healed, in the observation group and control group the ROM ((130.56±5.96)° and (121.45±7.32)°) of the injured knee had increased, and the difference in posterior tibial translation ((1.17±0.61) and (1.94±0.57) mm) had decreased. However, the ROM in the observation group was significantly greater than that in the control group, and the difference in posterior tibial translation was significantly lower in the observation group, with statistically significant differences ( t values were 5.56 and 5.29 respectively; both P<0.001). Conclusions:Compared to the posterior "S" shape incision approach, the medial small incision approach with suture anchors for treating PCL tibial avulsion fractures offers advantages such as reduced trauma, shorter operation time, and less intraoperative blood loss, which is more beneficial for knee joint functional recovery.
