横穿钉与界面螺钉重建前交叉韧带的临床对比研究

Clinical Comparison of Femoral Rigid fixation and Interference Screw Fixation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

目的:比较关节镜下应用横穿钉(Rigidfix)和可吸收界面螺钉(Biocryl)固定腘绳肌重建膝关节前交叉韧带的疗效,探讨应用Rigidfix固定系统重建ACL的临床效果。方法:2005年3月-2007年2月,对32例经关节镜检证实前交叉韧带损伤的病人随机使用股骨端Rigidfix系统固定或者界面螺钉固定腘绳肌两种方法重建前交叉韧带。结果:2组病人术后无并发症发生,Rigidfix组获随访15～32个月,术后12个月Lysholm评分85～93分(89.60±3.28)分;界面螺钉组获随访17～29个月,术后12个月Lysholm评分83～92分(88.80±2.92)分,组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:Rigidfix固定系统在股骨端固定腘绳肌重建前交叉韧带是一种安全有效的方法,在近期的随访中临床疗效与界面螺钉固定的方法比较没有差别。

Objective：A randomized clinical study was conducted to compare the outcome between RigidFix and interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament（ACL） reconstructions with 4-strand hamstring tendon.Methods：From March 2005 to February 2007,a total of 32 patients with hamstring ACL reconstruction were divided into RigidFix group（n=18,11males and 7 females,range 19~49 years） and the interference screw fixation group（n=14,10 males and 4 females,range 20~42 years）.There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with regard to range of motion and lysholm score.All patients followed the same postoperative program and got a clinical assessment at 3,6,and 12 months after surgery.Results：There were no complications in the two groups.The Lysholm score in RigidFix group at 12-month follow-up was（89.60±3.28）,and in interference screw group,the score at 12 month follow-up was（88.80±2.92）,indicating no significant difference between the two groups（P0.05）.Conclusion：The clinical results in this study clarified that Rigidfix is an effective and safe method for femoral hamstring fixation in ACL reconstruction,and there is no difference in Rigidfix and interference screw fixation technique in the comparison of the short-term follow-up.