重建固定股骨髁骨折联合膝关节镜下异体胫前肌腱一期重建前交叉韧带与二期重建的疗效比较

COMPARISON OF THE EFFICACY OF ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION(ACL) AT THE SAME PERIOD WITH RECONSTRUCTION OF FEMORAL CONDYLE FRACTURE AND AT THE SECOND PERIOD

目的比较分析重建固定股骨髁骨折联合一期膝关节镜下异体胫前肌腱重建前交叉韧带(ACL)与二期膝关节镜下异体胫前肌腱重建前交叉韧带(ACL)的疗效。方法 8例重建固定股骨髁骨折联合一期膝关节镜下异体胫前肌腱重建前交叉韧带(ACL),4例二期膝关节镜下异体胫前肌腱重建前交叉韧带(ACL),随访6～24个月,平均12.3个月。采用Lysholm膝关节评分、国际膝关节文献编制委员会分级评估标准(IKDC)检测评价疗效。结果两组间患者满意度、关节稳定性及功能差异均无明显差异。重建固定股骨髁骨折二期膝关节镜下异体胫前肌腱重建前交叉韧带(ACL)的治疗过程较联合一期膝关节镜下异体胫前肌腱重建前交叉韧带延长得多。结论重建固定股骨髁骨折联合一期膝关节镜下异体胫前肌腱重建前交叉韧带(ACL)与二期膝关节镜下异体胫前肌腱重建前交叉韧带(ACL)的疗效相近,但一期重建较二期重建具备更明显优势。

Objective To compare the efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction （ACL） at the same period with Reconstruction of femoral condyle fracture and at the second period. Methods 8 patients underwent anterior cruciate ligament recon- struction （ACL） with Reconstruction of femoral condyle fracture at the same period and 4 patients anterior cruciate ligament recon- struction （ACL） with Reconstruction of femoral condyle fracture at the second period, follow -up of 6 -24 months, average of 12.3 months. Lysholm knee score and the international knee documentation committee score （IKDC） were used to assess the results. Re- stflts There is no significant difference between the two groups in patients＇ satisfactory, stability of the joint, and its function. But the total curing course of anterior crueiate ligament reconstruction （ACL） with Reconstruction of femoral eondyle fracture at the same period is much shorter than the time of only Reconstruction of femoral condyle fracture in the first period and delayed ACL. CouclusioR Anterior crueiate ligament reconstruction （ACL） with Reconstruction of femoral condyle fracture at the same period has good effect, and the total curing course of the first phase reconstruction of ACL is much shorter than the second one.