{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.041103017689906346, 'fraction_numerical': 0.026534859521331947, 'mean_word_length': 4.844984802431611, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Case-control studies on clinical effects of non- and remnant preservation for reconstruction of posterior cruciate ligament].

OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the methods and therapeutic effects of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction with remnant preservation and no preservation.


METHODS
From January 2006 to January 2011,45 patients received arthroscopic PCL reconstruction by using hamstring tendon autograft fixed with bioabsorbable interference screw. Twenty-five patients were treated with PCL reconstruction with remnant no preservation, including 19 males and 6 females. During the operation, remnant PCL was not preserved, double-screws and whole-bone-tunnel technique was used to fix the tibial side. Twenty patients were treated with PCL reconstruction with remnant preservation, including 15 males and 5 females. Although the fixation technique was similar to the remnant no preservation group, the remnant was preserved. All the patients were followed up with a mean period of 18 months. Each patient was evaluated using the following variables: posterior laxity on KT-2000, Lysholm knee score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) knee score and grade.


RESULTS
At the latest follow-up, the results of mean side-to-side differences in posterior tibial translation, Lysholm knee score and IKDC score were (4.2 +/- 2.1) mm, 84.3 +/- 10.5 and 64.5 +/- 8.8 in the remnant no preservation group separately, and (3.9 +/- 1.8) mm, 86.5+/- 8.9 and 68.6 +/- 7.9 in the remnant preservation group separately. There were no statistical differences of above results between the two groups. However, IKDC objective grade differed significantly between the two groups and the result in remnant preservation group was better than that of remnant no preservation group.


CONCLUSION
Remnant preservation in PCL reconstruction can provide better activity-related outcomes than remnant no preservation.