eISSN: 1896-9151
ISSN: 1734-1922
Archives of Medical Science
Current issue Archive Manuscripts accepted About the journal Special issues Editorial board Abstracting and indexing Subscription Contact Instructions for authors Ethical standards and procedures
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
2/2015
vol. 11
 
Share:
Share:
more
 
 
abstract:

Clinical research
Arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with allograft versus autograft

Xiujiang Sun
,
Jianfeng Zhang
,
Xiaoyi Qu
,
Yanping Zheng

Arch Med Sci 2015; 11, 2:395–401
Online publish date: 2015/04/23
View full text
Get citation
ENW
EndNote
BIB
JabRef, Mendeley
RIS
Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero
AMA
APA
Chicago
Harvard
MLA
Vancouver
 
Introduction: The aim of the study was to compare and analyze retrospectively the outcomes of arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autograft versus allograft.

Material and methods: Seventy-one patients who underwent arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with an autograft or allograft met our inclusion criteria. There were 36 patients in the autograft group and 35 patients in the allograft group. All the patients were evaluated by physical examination and a functional ligament test. Comparative analysis was done in terms of operation time, incision length, fever time, postoperative infection rate, incidence of numbness and dysesthesia around the incision, as well as a routine blood test.

Results: The average follow-up of the autograft group was 3.2 ±0.2 years and that of the allograft group was 3.3 ±0.6 years; there was no significant difference (p > 0.05). No differences existed in knee range of motion, Lysholm scores, International Knee Documentation Committee standard evaluation form and Tegner activity score at final follow-up (p > 0.05), except that patients in the allograft group had a shorter operation time and incision length and a longer fever time (p < 0.05). We found a difference in posterior drawer test and KT-2000 arthrometer assessment (p < 0.05). The posterior tibia displacement averaged 3.8 ±1.5 mm in the autograft group and 4.8 ±1.7 mm in the allograft group (p < 0.05). The incidence of numbness and dysesthesia around the incision in the autograft group was higher than that in the allograft group (p < 0.05). There was no infection postoperatively. The white blood cells and neutrophils in the allograft group increased more than those in the autograft group postoperatively (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: Both groups of patients had satisfactory outcomes after the operation. However, in the instrumented posterior laxity test, the autograft gave better results than the allograft. No differences in functional scores were found.
keywords:

posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, autograft, allograft, arthroscopy

FEATURED PRODUCTS
Quick links
© 2019 Termedia Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.
Developed by Bentus.
PayU - płatności internetowe