OBJECTIVE: To determine if double bundle hamstring autograft posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction could bring better outcomes than single bundle. METHODS: From June 2007 to June 2009, there were 22 subjects, including 16 male and 6 female patients with an average (37 ± 13) years old (16-54 years old) were reconstructed with single bundle PCL reconstruction (single bundle group), 24 subjects, including 18 male and 6 female patients with an average (37 ± 10) years old (17 - 52 years old) were reconstructed with double bundle PCL reconstruction (double bundle group). There were no differences between the two groups on patients' demographics and the duration from the injury to the operation (P > 0.05). Clinical outcomes, KT2000 and tunnel placements of all the patients were measured and analyzed. RESULTS: The two groups were retrospectively studied and compared with a (29 ± 9) months (24 - 55 months) follow-up. Operation duration of double bundle group was (92 ± 8) minutes which was significantly longer than the single bundle group (78 ± 13) minutes (t = 2.474, P < 0.05). IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores were all significantly improved at the last follow-up of both groups (single bundle group: t = 9.578, 13.115 and 8.165, P < 0.01; double bundle group: t = 4.390, 5.522 and 4.313, P < 0.05). Post operative KT2000 side-to-side difference of the double bundle group was significantly smaller than that of the single bundle group under maximum posterior force with the knee in 90° flexion ((1.5 ± 1.5) mm vs. (4.0 ± 2.9) mm, t = 2.538, P = 0.019). There were 66.7% of the patients of double bundle group were normal which was significantly higher than 31.8% of the single bundle group on the IKDC knee examination form (χ² = 5.576, P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Single or double bundle PCL reconstruction could restore the knee's stability and function satisfied. There are no differences between two groups in clinical scores, but double group manifestes a better anterior-posterior stability.
OBJECTIVE: To determine if double bundle hamstring autograft posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction could bring better outcomes than single bundle. METHODS: From June 2007 to June 2009, there were 22 subjects, including 16 male and 6 female patients with an average (37 ± 13) years old (16-54 years old) were reconstructed with single bundle PCL reconstruction (single bundle group), 24 subjects, including 18 male and 6 female patients with an average (37 ± 10) years old (17 - 52 years old) were reconstructed with double bundle PCL reconstruction (double bundle group). There were no differences between the two groups on patients' demographics and the duration from the injury to the operation (P > 0.05). Clinical outcomes, KT2000 and tunnel placements of all the patients were measured and analyzed. RESULTS: The two groups were retrospectively studied and compared with a (29 ± 9) months (24 - 55 months) follow-up. Operation duration of double bundle group was (92 ± 8) minutes which was significantly longer than the single bundle group (78 ± 13) minutes (t = 2.474, P < 0.05). IKDC, Lysholm and Tegner scores were all significantly improved at the last follow-up of both groups (single bundle group: t = 9.578, 13.115 and 8.165, P < 0.01; double bundle group: t = 4.390, 5.522 and 4.313, P < 0.05). Post operative KT2000 side-to-side difference of the double bundle group was significantly smaller than that of the single bundle group under maximum posterior force with the knee in 90° flexion ((1.5 ± 1.5) mm vs. (4.0 ± 2.9) mm, t = 2.538, P = 0.019). There were 66.7% of the patients of double bundle group were normal which was significantly higher than 31.8% of the single bundle group on the IKDC knee examination form (χ² = 5.576, P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: Single or double bundle PCL reconstruction could restore the knee's stability and function satisfied. There are no differences between two groups in clinical scores, but double group manifestes a better anterior-posterior stability.
Authors: Brian M Devitt; Ruchith Dissanayake; Joseph Clair; Richard J Napier; Tabitha J Porter; Julian A Feller; Kate E Webster Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2018-10-26
Authors: João Alberto Ramos Maradei-Pereira; Alexandre Estevão Vamos Kokron; César Augusto Martins Pereira; Marco Martins Amatuzzi Journal: Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) Date: 2019-10-29