Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Intraarticular Versus Intraarticular and Extraarticular Reconstruction for Chronic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Instability

1989; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 245; Issue: &NA; Linguagem: Inglês

10.1097/00003086-198908000-00030

1528-1132

GREGORY M. STRUM, James M. Fox, Richard D. Ferkel, FRED H. DOREY, WILSON DEL PIZZO, MARC J. FRIEDMAN, STEPHEN J. SNYDER, Keith L. Markolf,

Total Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes

One hundred twenty-seven patients were evaluated for the results of surgical stabilization in chronic anterior cruciate ligament instability. Eighty-four patients had been treated with intraarticular reconstruction alone, while 43 patients had been treated with a combination of intraarticular and extraarticular stabilization. Patients were evaluated by questionnaire to assess subjective and functional status by clinical examination of objective findings, and by roentgenograms and instrumented ligamentous stability testing. The follow-up interval averaged 45.2 months for the entire group (range, 24–90 months). Using a 200-point scale, the rating for the group treated with intraarticular reconstruction alone was 169.1, while the average rating for the group treated with combined intraarticular and extraarticular stabilization was 166.2. Overall, an excellent or good result was obtained in 67% of patients in the intraarticular only group and in 70% of the patients in the combined reconstruction group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of changes seen on roentgenograms or in terms of residual laxity measured by instrumented testing. Thus, there is no demonstrable benefit derived from combined intraarticular and extraarticular stabilization procedures for chronic anterior cruciate ligament instability, provided that a well-placed intraarticular substitute of sufficient strength is functional.