Imaging Study of the Changes of Patellofemoral Joint Parameters before and after Patellofemoral Internal Push Therapy for Patellofemoral Arthritis
By comparing the changes of Q Angle and articular cartilage before and after the treatment of patellofemoral arthritis with patellar internal push manipulation, the imaging support for patellar internal push was provided. This paper was to study the changes and correlation of patellar parameters (lateral patellar Angle, patellar anastomotic Angle, patellar index) of patellofemoral joint before and after patellofemoral internal push treatment, and to promote the clinical study of patellar internal push treatment of patellofemoral arthritis.
Collection in the People's Liberation Army 371 Hospital from January 2018 and June 2018, 45 patients with patellofemoral arthritis, aged 40 to 70, according to push has no conduct patellar manipulation treatment group, experimental group in 15 cases of random points, the blank group (A) (B) (C), treatment group, intra-articular injection of sodium hyaluronate of group A + patellar push technique treatment; In group B, standard oral dose of glucosamine hydrochloride and intra-articular injection of sodium hyaluronate were used. Group C was treated by standard oral administration of glucosamine hydrochloride and intra-articular injection of sodium hyaluronate + patellar internal push manipulation. After 6 months of follow-up, the observation indexes were compared. Through the establishment of relevant models and the analysis of relevant factors, X-ray and MRI were used to analyze the changes of lateral patella Angle, patella anastomosis Angle, and patella index and patella bone marrow edema volume before and after the treatment of patella internal push.
1. All patients in group A and group C received surgery successfully, and the average operation time, average bed rest time and average hospital stay in group A were all higher than that in group C. The follow-up period was more than 6 months.
2. All the patients in the treatment group showed significant relief of knee pain, and the VAS scores in the three groups decreased significantly 3 months after treatment and at the last follow-up compared with that before surgery, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05). Compared with group B, the differences in group A and C were statistically significant (P<0.05). The difference between group C and group A was statistically significant (P<0.05).
3. Knee joint function of all the patients was significantly improved, and Lysholm score and Kujala score of the three groups were significantly increased 3 months after treatment and at the last follow-up, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05). The differences between group A and group C and group B were statistically significant (P<0.05). The difference between group C and group A was statistically significant (P<0.05).
4. Imaging indexes of patellofemoral fitness Angle, patellar inclination Angle and patellar external displacement were significantly reduced in the three groups 3 months after treatment, with statistically significant differences (P<0.05). The differences between group A and group C and group B were statistically significant (P<0.05). The difference between group C and group A was statistically significant (P<0.05).
Through this research, prevention and early diagnosis for patellar arthritis to provide image support, in the treatment of patellar push patellofemoral arthritis and patellofemoral instability, providing imaging solutions for more patients with patellofemoral arthritis to provide a safe, noninvasive, low price and simple treatment, delay the development of knee osteoarthritis, relieve pain in patients with knee joint. To provide a new treatment for patients with knee osteoarthritis, improve the quality of life of patients, reduce medical costs, and improve social and economic benefits.
Keywords: Patella osteoarthritis; Internal patellar push; Parameter variation; Imaging
1 前言 1
2 资料及方法 3
2.1 研究对象 3
2.2 纳入与排除标准 3
2.2.1 纳入标准 3
2.2.2 排除标准 3
2.3 病例分组 3
2.4 治疗方法 4
2.5 观察指标 4
2.6 统计学处理 5
3 结果 6
3.1 A组和C组手术的相关指标比较 6
3.2 三组患者治疗前后的VAS评分比较 6
3.5 三组患者治疗前后影像学测量结果比较 7
4 讨论 9
5 结论 14
综 述 19