Objective To evaluate knee stability after double-bundle and single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Methods Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized controlled trials (quasi-RCTs) were collected from MEDLINE (1966 to October 2007), OVID (1950 to October 2007), The Cochrane Library (issue 4, 2007) and China Academic Journals Full-text Database (1979 to October 2007). The quality of included trials was assessed. Data analyses were performed with The Cochrane Collaboration’s RevMan 4.2.10 software. Results One RCT (quality B) and 5 quasi-RCTs (quality C) involving 426 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses showed significant differences between the two operative procedures in terms of anterior stability (WMD –0.75, 95%CI –1.14 to –0.37, P=0.000 1) and rotational stability [RR 1.38, 95%CI 1.17 to 1.61, Plt;0.000 1]. Conclusion The double-bundle anterior cruciate liagament is superior to single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament in terms of anterior stability and rotational stability. Since the included trials were small and of poor quality, more high-quality, large-scale randomized controlled trials are required.
In unicompartmental replacement surgery, there are a wide variety of commercially available unicompartmental prostheses, and the consistency of the contact surface between the common liner and the femoral prosthesis could impact the stress distribution in the knee after replacement in different ways. Medial tibial plateau fracture and liner dislocation are two common forms of failure after unicompartmental replacement. One of the reasons is the mismatch in the mounting position of the unicompartmental prosthesis in the knee joint, which may lead to failure. Therefore, this paper focuses on the influence of the shape of the contact surface between the liner and the femoral prosthesis and the mounting position of the unicompartmental prosthesis on the stress distribution in the knee joint after replacement. Firstly, a finite element model of the normal human knee joint was established, and the validity of the model was verified by both stress and displacement. Secondly, two different shapes of padded knee prosthesis models (type A and type B) were developed to simulate and analyze the stress distribution in the knee joint under single-leg stance with five internal or external rotation mounting positions of the two pads. The results showed that under a 1 kN axial load, the peak contact pressure of the liner, the peak ACL equivalent force, and the peak contact pressure of the lateral meniscus were smaller for type A than for type B. The liner displacement, peak contact pressure of the liner, peak tibial equivalent force, and peak ACL equivalent force were the smallest for type A at 3° of internal rotation in all five internal or external rotation mounting positions. For unicompartmental replacement, it is recommended that the choice of type A or type B liner for prosthetic internal rotation up to 6° should be combined with other factors of the patient for comprehensive analysis. In conclusion, the results of this paper may reduce the risk of liner dislocation and medial tibial plateau fracture after unicompartmental replacement, providing a biomechanical reference for unicompartmental prosthesis design.