A comparative study between laprade and Larson’s technique for posterolateral corner [PLC] Injury of knee

Abstract

In the last few decades, injuries to the knee joint are common because of knee pivoting sports. The mechanism of injury to the PLC is due to direct varus stress, hyperextension, or twisting of the knee. These injuries are commonly associated with cruciate ligament tears, but PLC injury are usually overlooked or misdiagnosed. If Left untreated, it can cause chronic pain and residual instability. PLC reconstruction is normally advocated for grade 2 or 3 lesions, as it is superior to conservative treatment. This study is to compare larson’s and laparde techinque. In Larson’s technique there is reconstruction of the fibular collateral ligament and popliteo fibular ligament. In LaPrade technique popliteus graft is reinforced to the PLC. This is a prospective study conducted in 40 patients between April 2016 to January 2018 in Deccan Medical College and Hospitals, to compare the clinical outcome of Laprade and Larson’s techniques in terms of best post-operative stability and function of an isolated PLC injury. Inclusion criteria:age ranging from 18 to 40 years, Posterio lateral corner injury, No previous surgery or damage in the affected knee or the contralateral knee. Exclusion criteria: Patients with medial collateral ligament injury, cruciate ligament injury, generalized ligamentous laxity and arthritis knee. Methods and analysis of results: it is randomized study between Larson’s technique and Laprade’s technique. Postoperative evaluation: is by Lysholm score, IKDC scores and Postoperative complications. In conclusion it revealed that both methods are significant, and equally good at postoperative outcomes.