Comparison results of Posterior Cruciate Ligament (PCL) reconstruction full arthroscopic techniques versus Arthroscopic with Minimal Invasive open techniques

Abstract

Background: Injury to posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) compared to the anterior cruciate ligament is not common. The damage has been reported that 3 to 20%. The goal of treatment is to prevent degenerative changes and improvement of patients function. The ideal treatment for posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injuries is controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of the reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament two ways with full arthroscopic and arthroscopic with arthroscopic with minimal invasive open. Methods: In this descriptive analytical study, 36 patients with grade 3 ligament injuries candidates to reconstruction were studied. They were in two groups of 18 subjects matched for age and types of injury were selected. The clinical, functional improvement and treatment failure were evaluated. Results: 18 patients underwent arthroscopic reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament with mean aged 42.9 ± 7.7 compared with 18 patients with mean aged 38.2±8.2 in group with arthroscopic with minimal invasive open. Tegner scores and Lyshom score performance between the two groups were not statistically significant. Infection and knee motion limitation were not observed in the two groups. Positive posterior drawer test(PDT) was in All arthroscopic procedures in 1 (6/5%)patients and in arthroscopic with minimal invasive open were in 2(11.1%). The mean posterior tibial displacement in both groups after the reconstruction of 4 millimeters and there was no statistically difference. Severity of pain after arthroscopic technique with mini-approach was significantly higher. Conclusion: Arthroscopy and arthroscopic technique with mini-approach reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament is favorable clinical outcomes in both methods. It seems to arthroscopic technique with minimal open approach to posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction was to be little benefit to patients. Selection of operation approach was related to our equipment.