• Title/Summary/Keyword: Running Head

Search Result 92, Processing Time 0.016 seconds

Anterolateral Ligament of the Knee: Anatomy, Biomechanics, Techniques, and Clinical Outcome (슬관절 전외측인대의 해부학, 생역학, 수술법 및 임상적 결과)

  • Kim, Seong Hwan;Lee, Tae-Hyub;Park, Yong-Beom
    • Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association
    • /
    • v.55 no.4
    • /
    • pp.281-293
    • /
    • 2020
  • An anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is one of the most frequent surgical procedures in the knee joint, but despite the better understanding of anatomy and biomechanics, surgical reconstruction procedures still fail to restore rotational stability in 7%-16% of patients. Hence, many studies have attempted to identify the factors for rotational laxity, including the anterolateral ligament (ALL), but still showed controversies. Descriptions of the ALL anatomy are also confused by overlapping nomenclature, but it is usually known as a distinctive fiber running in an anteroinferior and oblique direction from the lateral epicondyle of the femur to the proximal anterolateral tibia, between the fibular head and Gerdy's tubercle. The importance of the ALL as a secondary restraint in the knee has been emphasized for successful ACL reconstructions that can restore rotational stability, but there is still some controversy. Some studies reported that the ALL could be a restraint to the tibial rotation, but not to anterior tibial translation. On the other hand, some studies reported that the role of ALL in rotational stability would be limited as a secondary structure because it bears loads only beyond normal biomechanical motion. The diagnosis of an ALL injury can be performed by a physical examination, radiology examination, and magnetic resonance imaging, but it should be assessed using a multimodal approach. Recently, ALL was considered one of the anterolateral complex structures, as well as the Kaplan fiber in the iliotibial band. Many studies have introduced many indications and treatment options, but there is still some debate. The treatment methods are introduced mainly as ALL reconstructions or lateral extra-articular tenodesis, which can achieve additional benefit to the knee stability. Further studies will be needed on the indications and proper surgical methods of ALL treatment.

Excavation of Kim Jeong-gi and Korean Archeology (창산 김정기의 유적조사와 한국고고학)

  • Lee, Ju-heun
    • Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
    • /
    • v.50 no.4
    • /
    • pp.4-19
    • /
    • 2017
  • Kim Jeong-gi (pen-name: Changsan, Mar. 31, 1930 - Aug. 26, 2015) made a major breakthrough in the history of cultural property excavation in Korea: In 1959, he began to develop an interest in cultural heritage after starting work as an employee of the National Museum of Korea. For about thirty years until he retired from the National Research Institute of Cultural Heritage in 1987, he devoted his life to the excavation of our country's historical relics and artifacts and compiled countless data about them. He continued striving to identify the unique value and meaning of our cultural heritage in universities and excavation organizations until he passed away in 2015. Changsan spearheaded all of Korea's monumental archeological excavations and research. He is widely known at home and abroad as a scholar of Korean archeology, particularly in the early years of its existence as an academic discipline. As such, he has had a considerable influence on the development of Korean archeology. Although his multiple activities and roles are meaningful in terms of the country's archaeological history, there are limits to his contributions nevertheless. The Deoksugung Palace period (1955-1972), when the National Museum of Korea was situated in Deoksugung Palace, is considered to be a time of great significance for Korean archeology, as relics with diverse characteristics were researched during this period. Changsan actively participated in archeological surveys of prehistoric shell mounds and dwellings, conducted surveys of historical relics, measured many historical sites, and took charge of photographing and drawing such relics. He put to good use all the excavation techniques that he had learned in Japan, while his countrywide archaeological surveys are highly regarded in terms of academic history as well. What particularly sets his perspectives apart in archaeological terms is the fact that he raised the possibility of underwater tombs in ancient times, and also coined the term "Haemi Culture" as part of a theory of local culture aimed at furthering understanding of Bronze Age cultures in Korea. His input was simply breathtaking. In 1969, the National Research Institute of Cultural Heritage (NRICH) was founded and Changsan was appointed as its head. Despite the many difficulties he faced in running the institute with limited financial and human resources, he gave everything he had to research and field studies of the brilliant cultural heritages that Korea has preserved for so long. Changsan succeeded in restoring Bulguksa Temple, and followed this up with the successful excavation of the Cheonmachong Tomb and the Hwangnamdaechong Tomb in Gyeongju. He then explored the Hwangnyongsa Temple site, Bunhwangsa Temple, and the Mireuksa Temple site in order to systematically evaluate the Buddhist culture and structures of the Three Kingdoms Period. We can safely say that the large excavation projects that he organized and carried out at that time not only laid the foundations for Korean archeology but also made significant contributions to studies in related fields. Above all, in terms of the developmental process of Korean archeology, the achievements he generated with his exceptional passion during the period are almost too numerous to mention, but they include his systematization of various excavation methods, cultivation of archaeologists, popularization of archeological excavations, formalization of survey records, and promotion of data disclosure. On the other hand, although this "Excavation King" devoted himself to excavations, kept precise records, and paid keen attention to every detail, he failed to overcome the limitations of his era in the process of defining the nature of cultural remains and interpreting historical sites and structures. Despite his many roles in Korean archeology, the fact that he left behind a controversy over the identity of the occupant of the Hwangnamdaechong Tomb remains a sore spot in his otherwise perfect reputation.