Satoshi Ochiai1, Tetsuo Hagino2, Shinya Senga2, Takashi Yamashita2, Takashi Ando3, Hirotaka Haro3. 1. The Sports Medicine and Knee Center, National Hospital Organization, Kofu National Hospital, 11-35 Tenjin-cho, Kofu, Yamanashi, 400-8533, Japan. hxcmk230@ybb.ne.jp. 2. The Sports Medicine and Knee Center, National Hospital Organization, Kofu National Hospital, 11-35 Tenjin-cho, Kofu, Yamanashi, 400-8533, Japan. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Yamanashi, 1110 Shimokato, Chuo, Yamanashi, 409-3898, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the treatment outcome of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction using the Medical Outcome Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), a patient-based quality of life (QOL) questionnaire comparing it with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. METHODS: Patients who underwent reconstruction at our center for PCL (n = 24) or ACL (n = 197) injury were studied. The patients were evaluated using SF-36, visual analogue scale (VAS) for knee pain, Lysholm scale, posterior or anterior tibial translation and range of motion (ROM) before surgery until 24 months after surgery. Results were compared. RESULTS: In the ACL group, all evaluation methods showed significant improvement after surgery. In the PCL group, however, improvement was observed in only three of eight subscales of the SF-36, Lysholm score and posterior tibial translation after surgery. In intergroup comparison, the PCL group showed inferior performance in three subscales of the SF-36, Lysholm score and ROM for flexion compared with the ACL group. CONCLUSIONS: The surgical outcome of PCL reconstruction was inferior to that of ACL reconstruction both in patient-based and conventional doctor-based assessments. An improved surgical technique for PCL is required.
PURPOSE: This study evaluated the treatment outcome of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction using the Medical Outcome Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), a patient-based quality of life (QOL) questionnaire comparing it with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. METHODS:Patients who underwent reconstruction at our center for PCL (n = 24) or ACL (n = 197) injury were studied. The patients were evaluated using SF-36, visual analogue scale (VAS) for knee pain, Lysholm scale, posterior or anterior tibial translation and range of motion (ROM) before surgery until 24 months after surgery. Results were compared. RESULTS: In the ACL group, all evaluation methods showed significant improvement after surgery. In the PCL group, however, improvement was observed in only three of eight subscales of the SF-36, Lysholm score and posterior tibial translation after surgery. In intergroup comparison, the PCL group showed inferior performance in three subscales of the SF-36, Lysholm score and ROM for flexion compared with the ACL group. CONCLUSIONS: The surgical outcome of PCL reconstruction was inferior to that of ACL reconstruction both in patient-based and conventional doctor-based assessments. An improved surgical technique for PCL is required.
Authors: John D MacGillivray; Beth E Shubin Stein; Maxwell Park; Answorth A Allen; Thomas L Wickiewicz; Russell F Warren Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 4.772