The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2005;87:1-21.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.D.02711
© 2005 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
Surgical Management of Knee Dislocations
Anikar Chhabra, MD, MS1,
Peter S. Cha, MD2,
Jeffrey A. Rihn, MD1,
Brian Cole, MD3,
Craig H. Bennett, MD4,
Robert L. Waltrip, MD5 and
Christopher D. Harner, MD1
1 University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Center for Sports Medicine, 3200
South Water Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15203. E-mail address for A. Chhabra:
anikarchhabra{at}hotmail.com.
E-mail address for C.D. Harner:
harnercd{at}msx.upmc.edu
2 Beacon Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, 500 E-Business Way, Sharonville, OH
45241
3 Midwest Orthopaedics at Rush, 800 South Wells Street, Suite M30, Chicago, IL
60607
4 University of Maryland Medicine, 22 South Greene Street, Baltimore, MD
21201
5 East Suburban Orthopedic Associates, 2566 Haymaker Road, Suite 311,
Monroeville, PA 15146
Investigation performed at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
The original scientific article in which the surgical technique was
presented was published in JBJS Vol. 86-A, pp. 262-273, February 2004
The authors did not receive grants or outside funding in support of their
research or preparation of this manuscript. They did not receive payments or
other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a
commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or
direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational
institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the
authors are affiliated or associated.
The line drawings in this article are the work of Jennifer Fairman
(jfairman{at}fairmanstudios.com).
BACKGROUND:
The evaluation and management of knee dislocations remain variable and
controversial. The purpose of this study was to describe our method of
surgical treatment of knee dislocations with use of a standardized protocol
and to report the clinical results.
METHODS:
Forty-seven consecutive patients presented with an occult (reduced) or
grossly dislocated knee. Fourteen of these patients were not included in this
series because of confounding variables: four had an open knee dislocation,
five had vascular injury requiring repair, three were treated with external
fixation, and two had associated injury. The remaining thirty-three patients
underwent surgical treatment for the knee dislocation with our standard
approach. Anatomical repair and/or replacement was performed with fresh-frozen
allograft tissue. Thirty-one of the thirty-three patients returned for
subjective and objective evaluation with use of four different knee-rating
scales at a minimum of twenty-four months after the operation.
RESULTS:
Nineteen of the thirty-one patients were treated acutely (less than three
weeks after the injury) and twelve, chronically. The mean Lysholm score was 91
points for the acutely reconstructed knees and 80 points for the chronically
reconstructed knees. The Knee Outcome Survey Activities of Daily Living scores
averaged 91 points for the acutely reconstructed knees and 84 points for the
chronically reconstructed knees. The Knee Outcome Survey Sports Activity
scores averaged 89 points for the acutely reconstructed knees and 69 points
for the chronically reconstructed knees. According to the Meyers ratings,
twenty-three patients had an excellent or good score and eight had a fair or
poor score. Sixteen of the nineteen acutely reconstructed knees and seven of
the twelve chronically reconstructed knees were given an excellent or good
Meyers score. The average loss of extension was 1°, and the average loss
of flexion was 12°. There was no difference in the range of motion between
the acutely and chronically treated patients. Four acutely reconstructed knees
required manipulation because of loss of flexion. Laxity tests demonstrated
consistently improved stability in all patients, with more predictable results
in the acutely treated patients.
CONCLUSIONS:
Surgical treatment of the knee dislocations in our series provided
satisfactory subjective and objective outcomes at two to six years
postoperatively. The patients who were treated acutely had higher subjective
scores and better objective restoration of knee stability than did patients
treated three weeks or more after the injury. Nearly all patients were able to
perform daily activities with few problems. However, the ability of patients
to return to high-demand sports and strenuous manual labor was less
predictable.

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Technorati What's this?
|