RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To compare proprioception recovery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with a hamstring tendon autograft versus the artificial Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System (LARS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Forty patients (9 females, 31 males) with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture were enrolled in this prospective study. Patients were randomized to two groups, 1) ACLR using a hamstring tendon autograft (n = 20) or 2) ACLR using artificial LARS (n = 20). Proprioception was assessed with knee joint position sense (JPS) passive-passive test at 45° and 75° flexions, with the contralateral healthy knee as a control baseline to calculate the JPS error. Knee JPS absolute error was used as the main outcome variable and defined as the absolute difference between the reproduction and target angles. RESULTS: JPS error in both groups at 3 months after ACLR was significantly higher than that at 12 months. However, no significant difference in JPS error was detected between the LARS and autograft groups at either 3 or 12 months after ACLR. Analyzing JPS data by grouping patients according to whether ACLR was performed more or less than 1 year following injury regardless of graft type showed a statistically significant difference between the groups at 3 months, but not at 12 months, after ACLR. Patients receiving the graft within 1 year of injury had a lower JPS error than those receiving the graft more than 1 year after injury at 3 months. No complications were associated with either ACLR method. CONCLUSION: ACLR with a hamstring tendon autograft or LARS artificial graft is similarly safe and effective for recovering knee proprioception.
Asunto(s)
Lesiones del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior , Reconstrucción del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior , Femenino , Masculino , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Autoinjertos , Reconstrucción del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/efectos adversos , Trasplante Autólogo , Propiocepción , Lesiones del Ligamento Cruzado Anterior/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Limb salvage reconstruction for pelvic tumors, especially periacetabular tumors, is challenging. We combined the use of dual mobility bearing and 3D-printed hemipelvic prosthesis to improve function and reduce the probability of complications after hemi-pelvic resection in patients with primary acetabular malignancy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this combination. METHODS: Between October 2011 and May 2021, 11 patients with malignancies involving the acetabulum received hemipelvic replacement with a 3D-printed prosthesis and dual mobility bearing. Follow-up of postoperative survival, complications, and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society 93 (MSTS-93) lower limb functional scores were carried out. A finite element model of the postoperative pelvis was developed and input into the finite element analysis software. The Von Mises equivalent stress formula was used to analyze the stress distribution of each part of the pelvis under one gait cycle and the stress distribution at different angles of the hip joint. RESULTS: By the last follow-up, 9 of the 11 patients (81.8%) were still alive, and 2 patients had local tumor recurrence. The complications including 1 deep infection and 1 dislocation of the artificial joint. Excluding 1 amputation patient, the average score of the remaining 8 patients at the last follow-up was 21.4/30 (71.3%) on the MSTS-93. In the reconstructed pelvis, stress distributions were concentrated on the junction between hemipelvic prosthesis and screw and iliac bone on the resected side, and between femoral prosthesis stem and femoral bulb, while the stress of polyethylene lining was small. Before impact, the polyethylene lining will rotate at a small angle, about 3°. The inner stress of polyethylene liner is greater than the outer stress in all conditions. The polyethylene liner has no tendency to slide out. CONCLUSION: Pelvic tumor resection and reconstruction using 3D-printed hemipelvic prosthesis combined with dual mobility bearing was an effective treatment for pelvic tumors. Our patients achieved good early postoperative efficacy and functional recovery. The dual mobility bearing is beneficial to prevent dislocation, and the mechanical distribution and wear of the prosthesis are acceptable.