The Knee · 2024
Surgically treated acute knee dislocations with knee stiffness perform equally as well as non-stiff knees when treated with arthroscopic arthrolysis.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fahlbusch Hendrik, Neumann Markus, Frings Jannik, Frosch Karl-Heinz, Krause Matthias
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Postoperative knee stiffness is a common issue in multiligament knee injuries (MLKIs). This study aims to compare outcomes between MLKI patients who underwent postoperative arthroscopic lysis of arthrofibrosis (LOA) for limited range of motion (ROM) and those who did not.
METHODS: Thirty-one patients (10 IIIM, nine IIIL and 12 IV) were included in this retrospective clinical study with acute type III or IV knee dislocations, while two patients were lost to follow up. Thirteen patients underwent LOA at a mean of 18.7 ± 8.4 weeks (Group A), while 18 did not require this intervention (Group B). Patient-reported outcome measures (IKDC, Lysholm, VAS) and ROM were evaluated.
RESULTS: The average follow up period was 31.0 ± 10.2 months. The mean time to LOA was 19.4 ± 7.6 weeks and a significant increase in ROM was observed after LOA (flexion: before LOA: 83.8° ± 19.2, after LOA: 119.6° ± 9.9; P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between groups regarding clinical scores (Lysholm: Group A 85.0 ± 13.4, Group B 84.6 ± 14.5; IKDC: Group A 74.3 ± 10.8, Group B 76.7 ± 14.7) and ROM (flexion: Group A 118.6° ± 9.8, Group B 124.3° ± 12.8). There were no complications regarding LOA.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients, whether undergoing LOA or not, performed equally well in terms of ROM and clinical scores at final follow up, while timing of LOA appears less critical. LOA is a simple, durable and safe method of treating ROM deficits in patients treated for acute knee dislocation, with very good results.
METHODS: Thirty-one patients (10 IIIM, nine IIIL and 12 IV) were included in this retrospective clinical study with acute type III or IV knee dislocations, while two patients were lost to follow up. Thirteen patients underwent LOA at a mean of 18.7 ± 8.4 weeks (Group A), while 18 did not require this intervention (Group B). Patient-reported outcome measures (IKDC, Lysholm, VAS) and ROM were evaluated.
RESULTS: The average follow up period was 31.0 ± 10.2 months. The mean time to LOA was 19.4 ± 7.6 weeks and a significant increase in ROM was observed after LOA (flexion: before LOA: 83.8° ± 19.2, after LOA: 119.6° ± 9.9; P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between groups regarding clinical scores (Lysholm: Group A 85.0 ± 13.4, Group B 84.6 ± 14.5; IKDC: Group A 74.3 ± 10.8, Group B 76.7 ± 14.7) and ROM (flexion: Group A 118.6° ± 9.8, Group B 124.3° ± 12.8). There were no complications regarding LOA.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients, whether undergoing LOA or not, performed equally well in terms of ROM and clinical scores at final follow up, while timing of LOA appears less critical. LOA is a simple, durable and safe method of treating ROM deficits in patients treated for acute knee dislocation, with very good results.