Efficacy of computer navigation-assisted versus conventional arthroscopic transtibial tunnel reconstruction for medial meniscus posterior root tear
Objective To investigate the efficacy of computer navigation-assisted versus conventional arthroscopic transtibial tunnel reconstruction in the treatment of medial meniscus posterior root (MMPR) tear. Methods A total of 41 patients who underwent arthroscopic transtibial tunnel reconstruction for MMP...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | zho |
| Published: |
Editorial Office of Journal of Precision Medicine
2025-02-01
|
| Series: | 精准医学杂志 |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://jpmed.qdu.edu.cn/fileup/2096-529X/PDF/1744957584675-17069722.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Objective To investigate the efficacy of computer navigation-assisted versus conventional arthroscopic transtibial tunnel reconstruction in the treatment of medial meniscus posterior root (MMPR) tear. Methods A total of 41 patients who underwent arthroscopic transtibial tunnel reconstruction for MMPR tear in our hospital from September 2021 to March 2023 were enrolled and divided into group A (conventional arthroscopic transtibial tunnel reconstruction) and group B (computer navigation-assisted arthroscopic transtibial tunnel reconstruction). The two groups were compared in terms of time of operation, number of times of guide pin drilling, perioperative complications, range of knee motion, Lysholm score, IKDC score, and positive rate of McMurray test before and after surgery, as well as the position of the tibial tunnel exit on the coronal, sagittal, and axial planes measured by MRI after surgery. Results At the final follow-up, the patients in both groups tested negative for McMurray sign, and compared with group A, group B had a significantly shorter time of operation and a significantly lower number of times of guide pin drilling during surgery (t=-4.85,Z=-1.98,P<0.05). Both groups had significant increases in range of knee motion, Lysholm score, and IKDC score at 1 year after surgery (t=14.05-43.46,P<0.01), but there were no significant differences in these indicators between the two groups (P>0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the distance from the center of tibial tunnel exit to preoperative MMPR stump on the coronal, sagittal, and axial planes on MRI (P>0.05). Conclusion Compared with conventional arthroscopic transtibial tunnel reconstruction, computer navigation-assisted arthroscopy can improve the efficiency and accuracy of intraoperative tunnel positioning in the treatment of MMPR tear and is safe and reliable, and therefore, it holds promise for clinical application. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2096-529X |