Literature DB >> 23377797

Augmentation or reconstruction of PCL? A quantitative review.

Angelo Del Buono1, Juri Radmilovic, Giuseppe Gargano, Salvatore Gatto, Nicola Maffulli.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this quantitative review is to document effectiveness and complications of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) surgery and compare outcomes, advantages and disadvantages of reconstructive and augmentation procedures.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Medline, Ovid, Google Scholar and Embase databases using the combined keywords "PCL reconstruction," "PCL augmentation," "clinical outcomes" and "functional outcomes" with no limit for year of publication. Articles were included if they reported data on clinical, functional and imaging outcomes who had undergone reconstruction or augmentation of the PCL for management of PCL injuries. Two authors screened the selected articles for title, abstract and full text in accordance with predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The methodological quality of all articles was assessed by two authors according to the Coleman methodology score. The critical appraisal was made using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale.
RESULTS: A total of 34 studies, 22 retrospective, 9 prospective and 5 were randomized control trials were included by full text. The modified Coleman methodology score averaged 70.8 (SD 6.5), median 73 (range from 60 to 82). At IKDC assessment, the average rate of normal (A) and nearly normal (B) outcomes was 89.8% (SD 4.2) (from 85 to 93%; median 91.4) after PCL augmentation and 80.1% (SD 12.4) after PCL reconstruction (from 57.2 to 100%; median 81.8 %) were rated as normal (A) and nearly normal (B). The average Lysholm Knee Scores after PCL augmentation were 93.1 points (SD 1.9) and ranged from 82.1 to 94.2 (median 90.5) after PCL reconstruction. The KT 1000 difference improved from an average preoperative difference of 8.8 mm (SD 0.9) to an average postoperative of 2.1 mm (SD 0.6) after PCL augmentation (average improvement of 6.7 mm (SD 4.7)) and from 8.2 (SD 3.6) to 2.3 mm (SD 2.0) (average improvement of 5.9 mm SD 4.2) after PCL reconstruction. Postoperatively, the Telos stress radiographic side to side difference averagely improved by 8.6 mm (SD 6.1) after PCL augmentation, from 11.1 mm (SD 1.4) to 2.5 mm (SD 0.4), and by 8.0 mm (SD 5.7) after PCL reconstruction, from 11.5 mm (SD 2.2) to 3.5 mm (SD 1.3).
CONCLUSIONS: Augmentation and reconstruction procedures are grossly equivalent, but more data examining the long-term functional status, recovery to preinjury daily and sport activities and occurrence of degenerative changes are needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23377797     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-013-2418-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  50 in total

1.  Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Christopher G Maher; Catherine Sherrington; Robert D Herbert; Anne M Moseley; Mark Elkins
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2003-08

2.  Clinical comparison of conventional and remnant-preserving transtibial single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction combined with posterolateral corner reconstruction.

Authors:  Sung-Jae Kim; Sung-Hwan Kim; Yong-Min Chun; Byoung-Yoon Hwang; Duck-Hyun Choi; Ji-Young Yoon
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2011-11-22       Impact factor: 6.202

3.  Arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using LARS artificial ligament: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Guangsi Shen; Youjia Xu; Qirong Dong; Haibin Zhou; Chen Yu
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2010-09-08       Impact factor: 2.192

4.  Arthroscopic double-bundle augmentation of posterior cruciate ligament using split Achilles allograft.

Authors:  Kyoung Ho Yoon; Dae Kyung Bae; Sang Jun Song; Chan Teak Lim
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.772

5.  Arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendon autograft: results with a minimum 4-year follow-up.

Authors:  Chih-Hwa Chen; Tai-Yuan Chuang; Kun-Chuang Wang; Wen-Jer Chen; Chun-Hsiung Shih
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-06-21       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  A comparison of arthroscopic single- and double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: review of 20 cases.

Authors:  Kazuhisa Hatayama; Hiroshi Higuchi; Masashi Kimura; Yasukazu Kobayashi; Hiroto Asagumo; Kenji Takagishi
Journal:  Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ)       Date:  2006-12

7.  Sandwich-style posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Jinzhong Zhao; Huangfu Xiaoqiao; Yaohua He; Xingguang Yang; Cailong Liu; Zhenfei Lu
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2008-03-21       Impact factor: 4.772

8.  Intratester and intertester reliability of the KT-1000 arthrometer in the assessment of posterior laxity of the knee.

Authors:  F E Huber; J J Irrgang; C Harner; S Lephart
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1997 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 6.202

9.  Arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with quadriceps tendon autograft: minimal 3 years follow-up.

Authors:  Chih-Hwa Chen; Wen-Jer Chen; Chun-Hsiung Shih; Shih-Wei Chou
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 6.202

10.  The role of the popliteofibular ligament in stability of the human knee. A biomechanical study.

Authors:  D M Veltri; X H Deng; P A Torzilli; M J Maynard; R F Warren
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1996 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 6.202

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Acute augmentation for interstitial insufficiency of the posterior cruciate ligament. A two to five year clinical and radiographic study.

Authors:  Terence Wai-Kit Chan; Chi-Chung Kong; Angelo Del Buono; Nicola Maffulli
Journal:  Muscles Ligaments Tendons J       Date:  2016-05-19

Review 2.  Arthroscopic Transtibial PCL Reconstruction: Surgical Technique and Clinical Outcomes.

Authors:  Jessica Shin; Travis G Maak
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2018-06

3.  The necessity of clinical application of tibial reduction for detection of underestimated posterolateral rotatory instability in combined posterior cruciate ligament and posterolateral corner deficient knee.

Authors:  Han-Jun Lee; Yong-Beom Park; Young-Bong Ko; Seong-Hwan Kim; Hyeok-Bin Kwon; Dong-Seok Yu; Young-Bok Jung
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  [Return to sport after surgical treatment of a posterior cruciate ligament injury : A retrospective study of 60 patients].

Authors:  M Ahrend; A Ateschrang; S Döbele; U Stöckle; L Grünwald; S Schröter; C Ihle
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 5.  Isolated posterior cruciate ligament tears: an update of management.

Authors:  Alfonso Vaquero-Picado; E Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2017-04-27

6.  Long-term outcomes after arthroscopic single-bundle reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament: A 7-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Rui Wang; Bin Xu; Lei Wu; Honggang Xu
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2017-09-27       Impact factor: 1.671

7.  Successful reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament: assessment of posterior cruciate ligament footprints using an objective coordinate system.

Authors:  Ines Vielgut; Andreas Weiglein; Stefan M Biber; Manuel Dreu; Andreas Leithner; Goria Hohenberger; Patrick Sadoghi
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 1.246

8.  Single versus double bundle in posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Filippo Migliorini; Andrea Pintore; Filippo Spiezia; Francesco Oliva; Frank Hildebrand; Nicola Maffulli
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-09       Impact factor: 4.379

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.