Clinical Comparison of Conventional and Remnant-Preserving Transtibial Single-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Combined With Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction

Kim, Sung-Jae; Kim, Sunghwan; Chun, Yong-Min; Hwang, Byoung-Yoon; Choi, Duck-Hyun; Yoon, Jungmin

doi:10.1177/0363546511428068

Cited by 33 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If remnant fibers are well preserved, it contributes to stability, aids in the restoration of proprioception by saving mechanoreceptors, and prevents the killer-turn effect by acting like a cushion. 4,26,31,56 Postoperative proprioception recovered similarly to that of the uninvolved side, and we found a high rate of complete healing and synovialization on MRI and second-look arthroscopic surgery. We assumed that remnant PCL fibers would heal with the graft and provide less loosening of the graft induced by the killer turn and restoration of sensation for joint motion as well as position.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 56%

Clinical, Functional, and Morphological Evaluations of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Remnant Preservation

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 56%

Clinical, Functional, and Morphological Evaluations of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Remnant Preservation

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…20 In addition, the level of return to activity after ACL reconstruction was assessed according to the method defined by a previous study. 22 Patients who returned to the level of their preinjury activity according to the Tegner activity scale at 2 years after ACL reconstruction were considered as having accomplished return to activity and patients who returned to the level of their preinjury activity or just the one level below that according to the Tegner activity scale at 2 years after ACL reconstruction were considered as having accomplished near-return to activity.…”

Section: Clinical Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Autograft with Remnant Preservation: Comparison of Outcomes According to the Amount of Remnant Tissue

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been controversy about whether remnant tissue of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) has to be preserved in ACL reconstruction. The purpose of the study was to compare clinical outcomes between groups of patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft divided according to amount of ACL remnant and investigate effect of remnant preservation on outcomes of ACL reconstruction. A total of 185 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with BPTB autograft were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into four groups according to proportion of length of remnant tissue of injured ACL covering part of reconstructed ACL to total length of reconstructed ACL: group A included 83 patients with no remnant, group B consisted of 38 patients with remnant of < 1/3, group C consisted of 35 patients with remnant of 1/3 to2/3, and group D consisted of 29 patients with remnant of > 2/3. Primary outcome was International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score. Secondary outcomes were stability, range of motion, patient-reported outcomes determined by Lysholm knee scoring scale and Tegner activity scale, IKDC objective grade, and single hop for distance. Return to activity and near-return to activity were investigated. A minimum follow-up duration was 24 months. There was no statistically significant difference between four groups regarding postoperative anterior translation ( = 0.731), Lysholm knee score ( = 0.599), IKDC objective grade ( > 0.999), hop test ( = 0.878), and near-return to activity ( = 0.193). However, patients of group D had significantly better outcomes in IKDC subjective score (group A = 85.0 ± 5.9, group B = 84.9 ± 8.1, group C = 87.4 ± 6.4, group D = 89.2 ± 8.1, = 0.017), Tegner activity scale (group A = 5.0 ± 1.1, group B = 5.2 ± 1.0, group C = 5.7 ± 1.3, group D = 5.9 ± 1.0, = 0.001), and return to activity (group A = 25.3%, group B = 31.6%, group C = 45.7%, group D = 55.2%, = 0.014). ACL reconstruction using BPTB autograft with remnant preservation did not provide better anterior stability compared with conventional ACL reconstruction. However, preservation of remnant of> 2/3 led to more improved activity-related clinical outcomes than no remnant preservation. In cases with substantial remnant tissue of injured ACL remaining, reconstruction of ACL while preserving as much remnant tissue as possible is recommended. This is a Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic study.

show abstract

“…29,30 There were many studies that reported the outcomes of PCLR that included patients with posterolateral corner (PLC) injuries. 23,31,32 In PCLR the identification of concomitant injuries of the PLC is important for optimizing the surgical and clinical outcomes. We believed that the role of the PCL remnant would be clarified by comparing isolated PCLR with versus without remnant preservation.…”

Section: Remnant Preservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical Outcome of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With and Without Remnant Preservation

Song

Kim

Han

et al. 2015

Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical Comparison of Conventional and Remnant-Preserving Transtibial Single-Bundle Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Combined With Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction

Cited by 33 publications

References 42 publications

Clinical, Functional, and Morphological Evaluations of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Remnant Preservation

Clinical, Functional, and Morphological Evaluations of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Remnant Preservation

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Autograft with Remnant Preservation: Comparison of Outcomes According to the Amount of Remnant Tissue

Clinical Outcome of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With and Without Remnant Preservation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About