Skip to main content
Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery logoLink to Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery
. 2025 Dec;39(12):1526–1531. [Article in Chinese] doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202509008

前交叉韧带重建术中腓骨长肌腱残端不同处理方式对踝关节功能影响比较研究

Comparative study of different treatment methods for peroneus longus tendon stump in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Peng WANG 1, Zhiwei LIU 1, Zhonghua SHI 1, Fan ZHAO 1, Jiawen WANG 1, Huan LI 2,3,*
PMCID: PMC12705313  PMID: 41397795

Abstract

Objective

To compare the impact of different peroneus longus tendon (PLT) stump management techniques on ankle function following arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with autologous PLT grafts.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 60 patients with ACL rupture who met the inclusion criteria between August 2020 and July 2024. All patients underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using the autologous PLT grafts. Patients were assigned to group A [PLT stump sutured to peroneus brevis tendon (PBT), n=30] or group B (no stump intervention, n=30). The two groups showed no significant difference (P>0.05) in baseline data, including gender, age, body mass index, injury mechanism, affected side, preoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, ankle muscle strength, ankle range of motion, and arch-related angles. Postoperative outcomes were assessed using the AOFAS score, ankle muscle strength (eversion and first-ray plantar flexion), arch-related angles (medial/lateral longitudinal and anterior/posterior arch), ankle range of motion (eversion, inversion, dorsiflexion, plantarflexion), and limb symmetry index (LSI). Change values in muscle strength, arch-related angles, and range of motion from preoperative to 12 months postoperatively were calculated for intergroup comparison.

Results

Groups A and B had comparable PLT graft lengths and diameters (P>0.05). All patients were followed up 13-16 months (mean, 14.5 months). Postoperative complications included 1 case of incision infection, 1 case of deep vein thrombosis, and 1 case of knee stiffness in group A, 1 case of knee stiffness in group B. There was no significant difference in the overall complication incidences between groups (P>0.05). No significant difference was found in the AOFAS scores between different time points and between groups (P>0.05). At 12 months after operation, neither group showed significant changes from preoperative baseline in ankle strength, range of motion, or arch-related angles, and there was no significant difference in these change values between groups (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in LSI between the two groups at 6 or 12 months postoperatively (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Both suturing and leaving the PLT stump untreated during arthroscopic ACL reconstruction provided comparable ankle outcomes and well-preserved foot and ankle function.

Keywords: Peroneus longus tendon, peroneus brevis tendon, anterior cruciate ligament, ligament reconstruction, arthroscopy, ankle


前交叉韧带(anterior cruciate ligament,ACL)是十分重要且最易损伤的膝关节韧带[1-2],损伤后可导致膝关节不稳定和部分功能丧失,因此修复重建断裂ACL至关重要。目前,临床主要采用自体移植物行ACL重建,并能获得良好疗效[2-3]。腘绳肌腱是常用自体移植材料,但其长度和直径往往无法满足ACL重建要求,而且肌腱切取是对膝关节二次创伤[3]。腓骨长肌腱(peroneus longus tendon,PLT)因具有足够长度和直径、良好生物力学特性以及载荷强度与ACL相似的优点,作为ACL重建移植物材料应用越来越广泛[4]。目前,PLT取腱方法基本相同,但是对于残端处理方式尚未统一,大致可以分为两种:一种是将残端缝合在腓骨短肌腱(peroneus brevis tendon,PBT)上,保持PLT原有张力[5];另一种是残端不作处理,处于游离状态[6]。PLT取自踝关节,切取后残端不同处理方法对踝关节功能的影响差异尚缺少对比研究。为此,我们进行了一项回顾性比较研究,以期为临床选择恰当的残端处理方式提供参考。报告如下。

1. 临床资料

1.1. 一般资料

纳入标准: ① ACL完全断裂;② 关节镜下采用自体同侧PLT行单束ACL重建;③ 术后获完整随访。排除标准:① 有足踝陈旧性损伤病史;② 存在患侧下肢神经血管病变;③ 合并内侧副韧带、外侧副韧带或后交叉韧带损伤;④ 患侧存在活动性感染灶;⑤ PLT存在肌腱炎症、粘连或撕裂;⑥ 存在髋关节和踝关节活动功能障碍;⑦ 双侧下肢不等长。

2020年8月—2024年7月,常州市妇幼保健院骨科共60 例患者符合选择标准纳入研究。ACL重建术中30例PLT残端与PBT缝合(A组),30例不作任何处理(B组)。 两组患者性别、年龄、身体质量指数、致伤原因、损伤侧别以及术前美国矫形足踝协会(AOFAS)评分、踝关节肌力(外翻、第1跖列跖屈)、踝关节各向活动度、足弓相关角度等基线资料比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。见表1

表 1.

Comparison of baseline data between groups (n=30)

两组基线资料比较(n=30)

基线资料
Baseline data
A组
Group A
B组
Group B
统计量
Statistical
value
P
P value
性别(男/女,例) 25/5 28/2 χ2=1.456 0.228
年龄(x±s,岁) 30.6±7.6 32.8±8.1 t=1.088 0.281
损伤侧别(左/右,例) 14/16 12/18 χ2=0.271 0.602
身体质量指数(x±s,kg/m2 25.4±6.0 24.3±4.6 t=0.801 0.426
致伤原因(交通事故伤/运动伤/高处坠落伤,例) 18/10/2 20/9/1 χ2=0.491 0.782
AOFAS评分(x±s,分) 97.5±1.8 97.0±2.2 t=1.087 0.282
踝关节肌力(x±s,N)
 外翻 69.3±10.8 68.2±10.2 t=0.406 0.686
 第1跖列跖屈 154.7±15.8 152.9±16.5 t=0.432 0.668
踝关节活动度(x±s,°)
 外翻 20.4±7.7 20.5±6.8 t=0.455 0.651
 内翻 29.8±2.4 30.9±3.9 t=1.413 0.163
 背屈 24.6±6.7 23.3±7.8 t=0.710 0.480
 跖屈 37.0±6.5 35.4±8.5 t=0.818 0.417
足弓相关角度(x±s,°)
 内弓角 123.4±5.2 124.5±4.6 t=0.848 0.400
 外弓角 143.6±3.6 145.1±4.1 t=1.492 0.141
 前弓角 21.2±1.5 20.6±2.5 t=1.119 0.269
 后弓角 20.3±1.6 20.5±1.8 t=0.302 0.764

1.2. 手术方法

两组手术均由同一术者完成。全身麻醉下患者取平卧位,患侧大腿根部上止血带。取膝关节前内、外侧入路,镜下判断ACL完全断裂后,切取同侧PLT。具体步骤: ① 在患侧外踝尖后方1.0 cm至近端2.5 cm处,作一长1.5 cm切口;② 分离皮下组织、打开腱鞘,用血管钳挑出肌腱,辨认PLT和PBT,PLT位于PBT后外侧;③ 采用缝线缝合PLT并于缝合处远端将其切断,插入肌腱剥离器,在保持PLT张力情况下由远端向近端获取肌腱,注意肌腱剥离器勿超过腓骨头远端5 cm处,以免损伤腓总神经;④ 缝合皮肤和皮下组织。取腱过程中,A组将PLT残端缝合于PBT,保持PLT原有张力;B组PLT残端不作任何处理,使其处于游离状态。见图12。取腱完成后,将PLT上肌肉刮除,然后进行折叠、编织和标记,连接袢钢板后待用。关节镜下确定股骨和胫骨侧定位点,钻取股骨和胫骨隧道,在牵引线牵引下将肌腱移植物引入隧道,股骨侧袢钢板固定,胫骨侧利用挤压螺钉固定。

图 1.

Diagram of PLT stump management in group A

A组PLT残端处理示意图

a. 用血管钳挑出PLT和PBT;b、c. 缝合PLT和PBT; d. 分离PLT并将其用缝线缝合,此缝线作为取腱时牵引线;e. 在牵引线远端切断PLT

a. The PLT and PBT were delivered with a hemostat; b, c. The PLT was sutured to the PBT; d. The PLT was isolated and sutured with a traction suture for tendon harvesting; e. The PLT was transected just distal to the traction suture

图 1

图 2.

Diagram of PLT stump management in group B

B组PLT残端处理示意图

a. 用血管钳挑出PLT;b. 用缝线将PLT远端进行缝合,作为取腱时牵引线;c. 切断PLT;d. PLT残端处于游离状态

a. The PLT was delivered with a hemostat; b. A traction suture was placed on the distal end of the PLT for tendon harvesting; c. The PLT was transected; d. The remaining PLT stump was left free

图 2

1.3. 术后处理

两组术后处理方法一致。使用可调节支具固定膝关节于0° 伸直位。术后 1~3 d予以镇痛、消肿等对症支持治疗,患者可在家属辅助下进行踝泵运动和髌骨内推练习。术后1~3周行股四头肌和腘绳肌等长收缩训练,防止肌肉萎缩;3周后通过对支具角度的调节进行关节活动度练习,每天屈曲增加15°,4周内屈曲活动度达>120°。

1.4. 疗效评价指标

两组患者疗效评价均由同一名医师完成。① 踝关节功能:术前及术后6、12个月采用AOFAS评分评价踝关节功能。② 踝关节肌力测量:术前及术后12个月,使用测力计测量踝关节外翻及第1跖列跖屈力量,重复测量3 次,取最大值。③ 足弓测量:于术前及术后12个月足部侧位X线片,确定距骨头最低点(A点)、跟骨最低点(B点)、第1跖骨头最低点(C点)、跟骰关节最低点(D点)、第5跖骨头最低点(E点)、第 1 跖跗关节最低点(F点),测量足弓相关角度,包括纵弓角度(内弓角和外弓角)与横弓角度(前弓角和后弓角)。见图3。④ 踝关节活动度:术前及术后12个月,利用测角器测量踝关节外翻、内翻、背屈和跖屈角度。⑤ 踝关节平衡性:术后6、12个月采用单足跳跃试验测算患肢对称指数(limb symmetry index,LSI),LSI=(患侧跳跃距离/健侧跳跃距离)×100%,LSI≥90%表明踝关节肌力和稳定性良好。其中,踝关节肌力、足弓相关角度以及踝关节各向活动度计算手术前后差值(变化值)进行组间比较。

图 3.

Diagram of arch related-angle measurement

足弓角度测量示意图

∠BAC:内弓角 ∠BDE:外弓角 ∠BCF:前弓角 ∠DBE:后弓角

∠BAC: Medial longitudinal arch angle ∠BDE: Lateral longitudinal arch angle ∠BCF: Anterior arch angle ∠DBE: Posterior arch angle

图 3

1.5. 统计学方法

采用SPSS27.0统计软件进行分析。计量资料经Shapiro-Wilk检验均符合正态分布,数据以均数±标准差表示,两组间多时间点比较采用重复测量方差分析,若不满足球形检验,采用Greenhouse-Geisser法进行校正,同一组别不同时间点间比较采用 Bonferroni 法,同一时间点不同组别间比较采用多因素方差分析;两组间比较采用独立样本t检验,组内比较采用配对t检验;计数资料以频数及率表示,组间比较采用四格表卡方检验、列联表卡方检验或Fisher确切概率法。检验水准取双侧α=0.05。

2. 结果

A、B组术中取腱长度及移植物直径差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。两组患者均获随访,随访时间13~16个月,平均14.5个月。术后除A组1例发生切口感染(经清创和抗感染治疗后愈合)外,其他患者切口均Ⅰ期愈合;A组1例发生下肢深静脉血栓形成,经取栓后膝关节功能良好;两组各1例发生膝关节僵硬,经康复锻炼后膝关节伸屈功能恢复正常。两组总并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

两组踝关节AOFAS评分手术前后不同时间点间比较以及各时间点组间比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。见图4。术后12个月,两组踝关节外翻和第1跖列跖屈肌力、踝关节活动度(内翻、外翻、背屈、跖屈)、足弓相关角度(内、外弓角及前、后弓角)与术前比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);上述指标变化值组间比较差异亦无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在踝关节平衡性方面,术后6、12个月两组踝关节LSI差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。见表2图56

图 4.

图 4

Changes of AOFAS scores in the two groups

两组踝关节功能AOFAS评分变化趋势

表 2.

Comparison of outcome indicators between groups (n=30)

两组结局指标比较(n=30)

结局指标
Outcome indicator
A组
Group A
B组
Group B
效应值(95%CI
Effect value (95%CI)
P
P value
取腱长度(x±s,cm) 25.7±4.1 26.6±4.5 MD=0.967(−3.182,1.249) 0.386
移植物直径(x±s,mm) 8.4±0.5 8.2±0.4 MD=0.200(−0.264,0.462) 0.083
并发症 [例(%)] 3(10.0) 1(3.3) OR=3.222(0.316,32.889) 0.301
踝关节肌力变化值(x±s,N)
 外翻 0.6±14.4 −0.5±16 MD=1.130(−6.603,8.803) 0.781
 第1跖列跖屈 −0.1±19.5 0.6±23.7 MD=−0.703(−11.682,10.282) 0.901
踝关节活动度变化值(x±s,°)
 外翻 −0.1±6.9 0.5±8.7 MD=−0.627(−4.573,3.373) 0.768
 内翻 −0.3±5.9 −0.5±6 MD=0.236(−2.811,3.211) 0.897
 背屈 0.9±8.2 1.9±9.4 MD=−1.027(−5.464,3.464) 0.662
 跖屈 0.5±8.3 1.7±10.1 MD=−1.238(−5.878,3.478) 0.617
LSI(x±s,%)
 术后6个月 90.8±3.7 91.4±3.7 MD=−0.567(−2.495,1.362) 0.559
 术后12个月 94.7±2 93.4±3.9 MD=1.300(−0.322,2.922) 0.116
足弓相关角度变化值(x±s,°)
 内弓角 0.9±7.3 1.0±7.3 MD=0.185(−3.794,3.594) 0.958
 外弓角 −0.9±5.0 −1.2±5.9 MD=0.312(−2.467,3.067) 0.832
 前弓角 −1.0±2.4 −0.9±3.1 MD=0.116(−1.503,1.303) 0.889
 后弓角 1.1±2.3 0.1±3.9 MD=1.827(−0.620,2.620) 0.231

图 5.

A 33-year-old male patient with ACL rupture of right knee in group A

A组患者,男,33岁,右侧ACL断裂

a. 术前足部CT三维重建;b. 术后1年双足侧位X线片;c、d. 术后1年踝关节功能

a. Preoperative three-dimensional CT reconstruction of the foot; b. Lateral X-ray films of bilateral feet at 1 year after operation; c, d. Ankle function at 1 year after operation

图 5

图 6.

A 40-year-old male patient with ACL rupture of left knee in group B

B组患者,男,40岁,左侧ACL断裂

a、b. 术前及术后1年足部侧位X线片;c、d. 术后1年踝关节功能

a, b. Lateral X-ray films before operation and at 1 year after operation, respectively; c, d. Ankle function at 1 year after operation

图 6

3. 讨论

PLT位于小腿外侧,经外踝后方、跟骨外侧面及腓骨肌下支持带转至足底,斜行于足内侧缘,止于第1楔骨和第1跖骨基底部,主要作用是控制踝部跖屈和外翻,维持足弓和踝关节的稳定性[7-9]。ACL重建术中,PLT切取后将断端缝合于PBT的处理方式可能会影响PBT功能,导致踝关节活动度降低,引起足部肌力和功能不协调;如残端不作任何处理,可能导致PLT功能丧失,引起足部韧带松弛,降低足弓和踝关节的稳定性。有研究支持PLT残端与PBT进行缝合,可以保留部分PLT功能,防止肌腱回缩[10]。Goyal等[11]采用患肢PLT对37例患者行ACL重建,2年随访显示患侧和健侧踝关节活动范围及背屈、跖屈、外翻和第1跖列跖屈肌力以及AOFAS评分均无明显差异。Rhatomy等[12]的研究也获得相同结论。Sahoo等[13]采用HUMAC平衡系统对31例ACL损伤患者重建手术前后进行静、动态平衡评估分析。结果显示与术前相比,术后6个月时患侧肢体静、动态平衡均得到显著改善,且与健侧肢体无显著差异。但是也有研究支持可以选择残端不与PBT缝合。Pilar等[6]认为不缝合PLT残端可以减少创伤,促进供区恢复。Ertilav等[14]随访了50例采用自体PLT进行ACL重建患者,结果显示术后供区踝关节力量(外翻、跖屈)与术前以及与健侧相比,均无显著差异。

PLT和PBT具有相互协同作用,并且PBT被认为具有比PLT更强的足外翻力量[15]。尽管PLT取腱后早期足踝主动活动范围和肌力会一定程度下降,但经过长期神经和肌肉适应性变化,这些损伤可能会修复,最终完全恢复功能[16]。Kerimoğlu等[17]对12 例采用PLT行ACL重建患者进行随访,术后 52 个月MRI检查显示PLT有再生能力。Shao等[18]的研究也获得相同结论。Kokubo等[19]研究了胫后肌和腓骨长肌对足弓的影响,发现胫后肌对内侧足弓有显著影响,但腓骨长肌在维持内侧纵弓方面并无重要作用。Velioğlu等[20]认为PLT稳定关节功能与其附着结构相关,其从楔骨延伸至第1、2跖骨,若取腱时保留止点和附着结构,则不会对足部生物力学有显著破坏。本研究两组均从外踝处获取PLT,未影响足底PLT止点和附着结构。随访结果显示两组患者踝关节AOFAS评分、肌力以及足弓相关角度与术前比较以及组间比较,均无明显差异(P>0.05)。

综上述, PLT残端与PBT缝合或者不作处理对踝关节功能影响无明显差异,且均保留了良好足踝功能。我们认为主要有以下两方面原因:① PBT外翻功能对PLT外翻作用进行代偿,保证了踝关节正常活动;② 足底附着结构维持了足底PLT张力,进而保证足弓稳定性。后续研究可以利用足底压力和步态分析进一步观测足踝变化。

利益冲突 在课题研究和文章撰写过程中不存在利益冲突;经费支持没有影响文章观点和对研究数据客观结果的统计分析及其报道

伦理声明 研究方案经常州市妇幼保健院伦理委员会批准(2023[62]号)

作者贡献声明 王棚:统计分析及文章撰写;刘志伟、石中华:文章审校;赵帆、王佳文:数据收集整理;李欢:研究设计和文章审校

Funding Statement

常州市卫生健康委科技项目青年项目(QN202331);江苏省卫生健康委预防医学科研课题(YI2023014)

Changzhou Municipal Health Commission Youth Science and Technology Project (QN202331); Jiangsu Provincial Health Commission Research Project on Preventive Medicine (YI2023014)

References

  • 1.Asif N, Khan MJ, Singhal U, et al Randomized controlled study comparing hamstring graft and peroneus longus tendon graft in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. J Orthop Case Rep. 2024;14(11):240–245. doi: 10.13107/jocr.2024.v14.i11.4980. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Agarwal A, Singh S, Singh A, et al Comparison of functional outcomes of an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using a peroneus longus graft as an alternative to the hamstring tendon graft. Cureus. 2023;15(4):e37273. doi: 10.7759/cureus.37273. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.王凡, 王国梁, 李彦林, 等 I. D. E. A. L技术与经胫骨隧道技术重建前交叉韧带的疗效比较研究. 中国修复重建外科杂志. 2024;38(8):987–994. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.202402029. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Punnoose DJ, Varghese J, Theruvil B, et al Peroneus longus tendon autografts have better graft diameter, less morbidity, and enhanced muscle recuperation than hamstring tendon in ACL reconstruction. Indian J Orthop. 2024;58(7):979–986. doi: 10.1007/s43465-024-01185-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Butt UM, Khan ZA, Amin A, et al. Peroneus longus tendon harvesting for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. JBJS Essent Surg Tech, 2022, 12(2): e20.00053. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.20.00053.
  • 6.Pilar A, Gm S, Nedumparampil MM, et al Evaluating the efficacy of peroneus longus tendon as an autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in indian female patients: A prospective cohort study. Cureus. 2024;16(10):e71665. doi: 10.7759/cureus.71665. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Singh MP, Verma M, Agrawal DR, et al Evaluation of ankle complications after peroneus longus tendon harvesting for ACL reconstruction. J Orthop Case Rep. 2025;15(6):207–212. doi: 10.13107/jocr.2025.v15.i06.5718. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Zhao Z, Tang L, Chen J, et al The effect of harvesting the anterior half of the peroneus longus tendon on foot morphology and gait. J Orthop Surg Res. 2024;19(1):69. doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-04429-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Hinz N, Müller MM, Eggeling L, et al MCL augmentation using a peroneus longus split tendon autograft satisfactorily restores knee stability with no impairment in foot function and with a low failure rate for concurrent ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2025;33(6):2122–2135. doi: 10.1002/ksa.12522. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.He J, Byrne K, Ueki H, et al. Low to moderate risk of nerve damage during peroneus longus tendon autograft harvest. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2022;30(1): 109-115.
  • 11.Goyal T, Paul S, Choudhury AK, et al Full-thickness peroneus longus tendon autograft for anterior cruciate reconstruction in multi-ligament injury and revision cases: outcomes and donor site morbidity. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2023;33(1):21–27. doi: 10.1007/s00590-021-03145-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Rhatomy S, Wicaksono FH, Soekarno NR, et al. Eversion and first ray plantarflexion muscle strength in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a peroneus longus tendon graft. Orthop J Sports Med, 2019, 7(9): 2325967119872462. doi: 10.1177/2325967119872462.
  • 13.Sahoo PK, Sahu MM Analysis of postural control following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with ipsilateral peroneus longus tendon graft. Malays Orthop J. 2023;17(1):133–141. doi: 10.5704/MOJ.2303.016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Ertilav D, Ertilav E, Dirlik GN, et al Donor site morbidity after removal of fullthickness peroneus longus tendon graft for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction: 4-year follow-up. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2024;91(3):170–174. doi: 10.55095/achot2024/023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Nguyen Hoang Q, Nguyen Manh K Anatomical and biomechanical characteristics of peroneus longus tendon: applications in knee cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery. Adv Orthop. 2023;2023:2018363. doi: 10.1155/2023/2018363. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Zhang S, Cai G, Ge Z The efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with peroneus longus tendon and its impact on ankle joint function. Orthop Surg. 2024;16(6):1317–1326. doi: 10.1111/os.14060. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Kerimoğlu S, Koşucu P, Livaoğlu M, et al Magnetic resonance imagination of the peroneus longus tendon after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2009;17(1):35–39. doi: 10.1007/s00167-008-0626-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Shao X, Shi LL, Bluman EM, et al. Satisfactory functional and MRI outcomes at the foot and ankle following harvesting of full thickness peroneus longus tendon graft. Bone Joint J, 2020, 102-B(2): 205-211.
  • 19.Kokubo T, Hashimoto T, Nagura T, et al Effect of the posterior tibial and peroneal longus on the mechanical properties of the foot arch. Foot Ankle Int. 2012;33(4):320–325. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2012.0320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Velioğlu K, Öner K, Aslan FG, et al. Harvesting the full thickness peroneus longus tendon is not associated with structural foot impairments: a 12- to 23-year follow-up study. Orthop J Sports Med, 2025, 13(4): 23259671251320659. doi: 10.1177/23259671251320659.

Articles from Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery are provided here courtesy of Sichuan University

RESOURCES