[Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization of the anterior cruciate ligament. Operative technique and short-term clinical results]

Clinical outcomes in dynamic intraligamentary stabilization technique for anterior cruciate ligament tear: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To compare the clinical outcome between dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in ACL tears.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched to identify published articles on clinical studies comparing DIS versus ACL reconstruction. The results of the eligible studies were analyzed in terms of anteroposterior knee laxity translation (ΔATT) between the injured and contralateral knees, and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm score, Tegner score, and ipsilateral ACL failure, implant removal, and ACL revision.

RESULTS

Five clinical studies including 429 patients with ACL tears met the inclusion criteria. DIS showed statistically comparable outcomes of ΔATT (P = .12), IKDC (P = .38), Tegner (P = .82), ACL failure (P = .50), ACL revision (P = .29) with ACL reconstruction. A significantly higher rate of implant removal (odds ratio for DIS vs ACL reconstruction, 7.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.72-22.00; P = .0001) but statistically higher Lysholm score (mean difference between DIS and ACL reconstruction, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.24-2.93; P = .02) were found in DIS group.

CONCLUSION

Five clinical studies including 429 patients with ACL tears met the inclusion criteria. DIS showed statistically comparable outcomes of ΔATT (P = .12), IKDC (P = .38), Tegner (P = .82), ACL failure (P = .50), ACL revision (P = .29) with ACL reconstruction. A significantly higher rate of implant removal (odds ratio for DIS vs ACL reconstruction, 7.73; 95% CI, 2.72-22.00; P = .0001) but statistically higher Lysholm score (mean difference between DIS and ACL reconstruction, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.24-2.93; P = .02) were found in DIS group.

Efficacy of Repair for ACL Injury: A Meta‑analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

We aim to compare the curative effect of primary repair for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury with reconstruction and provide the reliable evidence for its clinical application. The literatures were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Springer, and other medical literature databases published between January 1970 and June 2021. Basic characteristics, surgery technique, clinical outcome scores and physical examination results were recorded and evaluated. Seven randomized controlled trials (RCT) were eligible for inclusion. The results showed that there were no statistically significant differences between arthroscopic ACL repair and ACL reconstruction for Tegner, Lysholm, Lachman, KT-1000, range of motion (ROM), functional outcomes and reoperation rate (P>0.05), even the result of IKDC scores showed that arthroscopic repair was better than reconstruction (P=0.04). However, through the subgroup analysis, it was found that the short-term follow-up results of arthroscopic ACL repair were indeed better than those of open ACL repair. Therefore, we can assume that the arthroscopic ACL repair technique is an optional and promising surgical method to treat ACL injury.

Comparable Instrumented Knee Joint Laxity and Patient-Reported Outcomes After ACL Repair With Dynamic Intraligamentary Stabilization or ACL Reconstruction: 5-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Technical innovation has led to the renaissance of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair in the past decade.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The present study aimed to compare instrumented knee joint laxity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after ACL repair with those after primary ACL reconstruction for acute isolated ACL tears. It was hypothesized that ACL repair would lead to comparable knee joint stability and PROs at 5 years postoperatively in comparison with ACL reconstruction.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A total of 85 patients with acute ACL tears were randomized to undergo either ACL repair using dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) or primary ACL reconstruction with a semitendinosus tendon autograft. The primary outcome was the side-to-side difference in anterior tibial translation (ΔATT) assessed by Rolimeter testing at 5 years postoperatively. Follow-up examinations were performed at 1, 2, and 5 years. PROs were assessed using the Tegner activity scale, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, and the Lysholm score. Furthermore, the rates of recurrent instability, other complications, and revision surgery were recorded. A power analysis was performed a priori, and the Friedman test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Bonferroni correction were applied for statistical comparisons with significance set at P < .05.

RESULTS

The mean age at inclusion was 28.3 ± 11.5 years in the ACL repair group and 27.1 ± 11.5 years in the ACL reconstruction group. At 5 years postoperatively, a total of 64 patients (ACL repair: n = 34 of 43 [79%]; ACL reconstruction: n = 30 of 42 [71%]) were available for follow-up. At 5 years, ΔATT was 1.7 ± 1.6 mm in the ACL repair group and 1.4 ± 1.3 mm in the ACL reconstruction group (P = .334). Preinjury PROs were restored as soon as 1 year after surgery and plateaued until 2 and 5 years postoperatively in both groups. At the 5-year follow-up, the mean Lysholm score was 97.0 ± 5.4 versus 94.5 ± 5.5 (P = .322), respectively, and the mean IKDC subjective score was 94.1 ± 9.9 versus 89.9 ± 7.8 (P = .047), respectively, in the ACL repair group versus ACL reconstruction group. At 5 years postoperatively, 12 patients in the ACL repair group (35%; age <25 years: n = 10/12; Tegner score ≥7: n = 10/12) had recurrent instability, of whom 10 underwent single-stage revision ACL reconstruction. In the ACL reconstruction group, there were 6 patients with recurrent instability (20%; age <25 years: n = 6/6; Tegner score ≥7: n = 5/6); however, in 5 patients, staged revision was required. Differences between both groups regarding recurrent instability (P = .09) or ACL revision surgery (P = .118) were not statistically significant. Recurrent instability was associated with age <25 years and Tegner score >7 in both groups.

CONCLUSION

At 5 years after ACL repair with DIS, instrumented knee joint laxity and PROs were comparable with those after ACL reconstruction. Although no significant difference was found between repair and reconstruction, a critical appraisal of the rates of recurrent instability (35% vs 20%, respectively) and revision surgery (38% vs 27%, respectively) is needed. Young age and a high preinjury activity level were the main risk factors for recurrent instability in both groups. However, single-stage revision ACL reconstruction was possible in each case in the ACL repair group. Although ACL reconstruction remains the gold standard in the treatment of ACL tears, the present study supports the use of ACL repair with DIS as a feasible option to treat acute ACL tears in patients aged ≥25 years with low to moderate activity levels (Tegner score <7).

REGISTRATION

DRKS00015466 (German Clinical Trials Register).

Occurrence of inadequate ACL healing after Dynamic Intraligamentary Stabilization and functional outcome-a multicentre case series

Introduction

Dynamic Intraligamentary Stabilization (DIS) is a technique for preservation, anatomical repair and stabilization of a freshly injured anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term re-operation rate when compared to traditional autograft reconstruction.

Methods

Four, from the developer independent, centres enrolled patients that underwent ACL repair by DIS, according to the specific indications given by MRI imaging at a minimum follow-up of 12 months. The re-operation rate was recorded as primary outcome. Secondary outcome measures were the postoperative antero-posterior knee laxity (using a portable Rolimeter®), as well as the Tegner, Lysholm and IKDC Scores.

Results

A total of 105 patients were investigated with a median follow-up of 21 months. Thirteen patients were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 92 patients 15 (16.3%) had insufficient functional stability and required subsequent ACL reconstruction. These patients were excluded from further analysis, leaving 77 consecutive patients for a 12 months follow-up. The median age at time of surgery was 30 years for that group. At time of follow-up a median antero-posterior translation difference of 2 mm was measured. None of these patients reported subjective insufficiency (giving way), but in 14 patients (18.2%), the difference of antero-posterior translation was more than 3 mm. We found a median Tegner Score of 5.5, a median Lysholm Score of 95.0 and a median IKDC Score of 89.4.

Conclusion

The main finding of this multicentre study is a relevant re-operation rate of 16.3%. Another 18.2% showed objective antero-posterior laxity (≥ 3 mm) during testing raising the suspicion of postoperative non-healing. The failure rate of DIS in this study is higher than for reconstruction with an autologous tendon graft. However, our successfully treated patients had a good clinical and functional outcome based on antero-posterior knee laxity and clinical scores, comparable to patients treated by autograft reconstruction.

ACL Repair: A Game Changer or Will History Repeat Itself? A Critical Appraisal

Until the past decade the common thought was that the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) was not able to heal and restore knee stability. In this manuscript a brief review of studies of the developers and the early adaptors of four different modern ACL repair techniques are presented. The present status and considerations for the future of ACL repair and its research are shared. After promising short- to midterm ACL healing results by the developers, the results of the early adaptors show more variety in terms of rerupture and reintervention for other reasons. Risk factors for failure are a young age, high preinjury sports activity level, midsubstance ruptures and impaired integrity of the ACL bundles and the synovial sheath. There is a call for more clinical data and randomized clinical trials. Conclusion: an important finding of the past decade is that the ACL is able to heal and subsequently restabilize the knee. Patient selection is emphasized: the ideal patient is a non-high athlete older than 25 and has an acute proximal one bundle ACL rupture. Further research will have to show if ACL repair could be a game changer or if history will repeat itself.

Efficacy of Nonaugmented, Static Augmented, and Dynamic Augmented Suture Repair of the Ruptured Anterior Cruciate Ligament: A Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament suture repair (ACLSR) was abandoned late last century in favor of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) because of overall disappointing results. However, in recent years there has been renewed and increasing interest in ACLSR for treatment of ACL ruptures. Several contemporary ACLSR techniques are being used, but any difference in effectiveness is unclear.

HYPOTHESIS

Contemporary nonaugmented (NA), static augmented (SA), and dynamic augmented (DA) ACLSR leads to (1) comparable outcomes overall and (2) comparable outcomes between proximal third, middle third, and combined ACL rupture locations (a) within and (b) between ACLSR technique categories.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed in the MEDLINE and Embase databases for the period between January 1, 2010, and August 7, 2019. All articles describing clinical and patient-reported outcomes for ACLSR were identified and included, and outcomes for NA, SA, and DA ACLSR categories were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 31 articles and 2422 patients were included. The majority of articles (65%) and patients (89%) reported outcomes of DA ACLSR. Overall, there was high heterogeneity in study characteristics and level as well as quality of evidence (19 level 4; 7 level 3; 3 level 2; and 2 level 1). Most studies indicated excellent patient-reported outcomes. Overall, the variability in (and the maximum of) the reported failure rate was high within all ACLSR categories. The variability in (and the maximum of) the reported rate of all other complications was highest for DA ACLSR. Regarding ACL rupture location, the failure rate was highest in proximal ACL ruptures within the SA and DA ACLSR categories; rates of all other reported complications were highest in combined ACL ruptures within the DA ACLSR category. However, no studies in the NA category and only 1 study in the SA ACLSR category evaluated combined ACL ruptures. The majority of studies comparing ACLSR and ACLR found no differences in outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The amount of high-quality evidence for contemporary ACLSR is poor. This makes it difficult to interpret differences among ACLSR categories and among ACL rupture locations and, though promising, to establish the role of ACLSR in the treatment of ACL ruptures. More high-quality large randomized clinical trials with longer follow-up comparing ACLSR and ACLR are needed.

Repair With Dynamic Intraligamentary Stabilization Versus Primary Reconstruction of Acute Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears: 2-Year Results From a Prospective Randomized Study

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair has once again become a focus of research because of the development of new techniques.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose was to compare the functional results and recurrent instability rates in patients undergoing ACL repair with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) versus primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR) for acute isolated ACL tears. The hypothesis was that functional results and knee joint stability after ACL repair with DIS would be comparable with that after ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A total of 85 patients with acute ACL tears were randomized to undergo either ACL repair with DIS or primary ACLR. The preinjury activity level and function were recorded. Follow-up examinations were performed at 6 weeks and 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Anterior tibial translation (ATT) was evaluated using Rolimeter testing. The Tegner activity scale, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective form, and Lysholm knee scoring scale scores were obtained. Clinical failure was defined as ΔATT >3 mm in combination with subjective instability. Recurrent instability and other complications were recorded.

RESULTS

There were 83 patients (97.6%) who were successfully followed until 2 years. ATT was significantly increased in the DIS group compared with the ACLR group (ΔATT, 1.9 vs 0.9 mm, respectively; P = .0086). A total of 7 patients (16.3%) in the DIS group had clinical failure and underwent single-stage revision. In the ACLR group, 5 patients (12.5%) had failure of the reconstruction procedure; 4 of these patients required 2-stage revision. The difference in the failure rate was not significant (P = .432). There were 4 patients (3 in the DIS group and 1 in the ACLR group) who showed increased laxity (ΔATT >3 mm) without subjective instability and did not require revision. Recurrent instability was associated with young age (<25 years) and high Tegner scores (>6) in both groups. No significant differences between ACL repair with DIS and ACLR were found for the Tegner, IKDC, and Lysholm scores at any time.

CONCLUSION

Whereas ATT measured by Rolimeter testing was significantly increased after ACL repair with DIS, clinical failure was similar to that after ACLR. In addition, functional results after ACL repair with DIS for acute tears were comparable with those after ACLR. The current study supports the use of ACL repair with DIS as an option to treat acute ACL tears.

REGISTRATION

DRKS00015466 (German Clinical Trials Register).

[Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization of acute anterior femoral cruciate ligament rupture : Preliminary and intermediate clinical results]

BACKGROUND

The results of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction demonstrate excellent short and mid-term results; however, long-term follow-up results are compromized by high rates of osteoarthritis. Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) focuses on preserving the cruciate ligament. The short and mid-term results of the dynamic ligamentary cruciate ligament suture from a nondevelopmental hospital are presented.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 73 consecutive patients with an acute rupture of the ACL were included in this prospective study. Patients were surgically treated between July 2014 and October 2017 with DIS within 21 days after ACL rupture. All patients were reviewed before the operation, 60 patients reached a 3‑month follow-up , 51 patients reached a 6‑month follow-up and 38 patients a 12-month follow-up. The perioperative and postoperative complication spectrum was recorded.

RESULTS

The positive results of the developmental clinics were confirmed. The Tegner, Lysholm and International knee documentation Committee (IKDC) scores showed very good results 12 months after surgery. The intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were low at 1.4% and 6.8%, respectively. Postoperative restrictions on movement required re-arthroscopy in 3 patients, 66% of the patients had concomitant damage to the knee joint, which could be treated simultaneously.

CONCLUSION

The dynamic intraligamentary cruciate liament suture (Ligamys) is a successful additional option in the sugical treatment of acute femoral ACL rupture. A high proportion of collateral damage and injuries of the knee joint can be detected and simultaneously treated.

Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization of anterior cruciate ligament repair: hardware removal has no effect on knee laxity at 2-year follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) stabilizes the knee joint during anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) healing. After 6 months, tibial hardware removal is offered to the patients if local discomfort at the implant site is present.

AIM

This study compared knee laxity and functional scores 2 years after DIS between patients with and without hardware removal. It is hypothesized that it does not affect ACL healing.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study retrospectively analyzed prospectively collected data from 173 patients with either hardware removal (n = 47) or no additional intervention (n = 126). Inverse probability of treatment weighting using the propensity score was applied to balance the groups for baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was the side-to-side difference in knee laxity measured with the rolimeter at manual maximum force (Δ-Lachman). Secondary outcomes were the pivot-shift test and subjective scores.

RESULTS

Mean age was 34 years in both groups, and female gender was 47% (hardware removal group) and 50% (control group), respectively. No significant differences were found for Δ-Lachman (p = 0.09), pivot-shift test (p = 0.41), and subjective scores (p > 0.10) two years after DIS.

CONCLUSION

Knee laxity 2 years after DIS in patients with tibial hardware removal and patients without hardware removal was not significantly different. The groups were also similar regarding all the assessed functional scores. This study confirms the hypothesis that the healing ACL resumes its stabilizing role, and the hardware can be removed beginning 6 months after surgery without adverse consequences for joint stability.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Case-control study, Level III.

Acute Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture: Repair or Reconstruction? Two-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Contemporary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) suture repair techniques have been subject to renewed interest in recent years. Although several clinical studies have yielded good short-term results, high-quality evidence is lacking in regard to the effectiveness of this treatment compared with ACL reconstruction.

HYPOTHESIS

Dynamic augmented ACL suture repair is at least as effective as anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction for the treatment of acute ACL rupture in terms of patient self-reported outcomes at 2 years postoperatively.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

After stratification and randomization, 48 patients underwent either dynamic augmented ACL suture repair or ACL reconstruction with a single-bundle, all-inside, semitendinosus technique. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score at 2 years postoperatively was the primary outcome measure. Patient-reported outcomes (IKDC subjective score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Tegner score, visual analog scale for satisfaction), clinical outcomes (IKDC physical examination score, leg symmetry index for the quadriceps, hamstrings strength, and jump test battery), and radiological outcomes as well as adverse events including reruptures were recorded. Analyses were based on an intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS

The lower limit for the median IKDC subjective score of the repair group (86.2) fell within the prespecified noninferiority margin, confirming noninferiority of dynamic augmented ACL suture repair compared with ACL reconstruction. No statistical difference was found between groups for median IKDC subjective score (repair, 95.4; reconstruction, 94.3). Overall, 2 reruptures (8.7%) occurred in the dynamic ACL suture repair group and 4 reruptures (19.0%) in the ACL reconstruction group; further, 5 repeat surgeries-other than for revision ACL surgery-took place in 4 patients from the dynamic ACL suture repair group (20.8%) and in 3 patients from the ACL reconstruction group (14.3%).

CONCLUSION

Dynamic augmented ACL suture repair is not inferior to ACL reconstruction in terms of subjective patient-reported outcomes as measured with the IKDC subjective score 2 years postoperatively. However, for reasons other than revision ACL surgery due to rerupture, a higher number of related adverse events leading to repeat surgery were seen in the dynamic augmented ACL suture repair group within 2 years postoperatively.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Dynamic augmented ACL suture repair might be a viable treatment option for patients with an acute ACL rupture.

REGISTRATION

NCT02310854 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization for ACL repair: a systematic review

PURPOSE

It was the aim to assess all published original research dealing with dynamic repair of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and to provide a semi-quantitative analysis of clinical outcome reports.

METHODS

Both OVIS and MEDLINE databases were utilized for allocation of articles. All preclinical and clinical studies related to dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) were identified. Results were tabulated and semi-quantitative analysis performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-three articles related to DIS were identified. The predominant level of evidence ranged between II and IV, with only one level I study. Reported failure rates ranged between 4% and 13.6%. Most clinical studies only reported revision rates without referring to failure of restoring stability. Highest success was achieved with proximal ACL ruptures. Both the level of physical activity and  patient age have been found to influence the risk of failure.

CONCLUSION

There is sufficient evidence to support that DIS repair may be an effective modality for the treatment of acute proximal tears of the ACL. However, comparative studies are lacking. Upcoming studies should compare the technique to ACL reconstruction with failure as an endpoint. Comparison to rigid methods of proximal fixation is also necessary to justify the need for dynamic fixation. Overall, there is evidence to suggest the potential space for ACL repair in the decision tree for individualized treatment planning. The best outcome will be in the hands of the best patient selectors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

High complication rate following dynamic intraligamentary stabilization for primary repair of the anterior cruciate ligament

PURPOSE

New strategies for dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) in the primary repair of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures are currently under debate. It has been proposed that these might serve as alternative techniques to conventional ACL reconstruction procedures using tendon autografts. The aims of the present investigation were to evaluate the functional results and critically assess the complication rate following primary ACL repair with DIS and to review existing reports of favourable clinical results with the method in relation to knee joint stability and patient satisfaction.

METHODS

Fifty-nine patients received dynamic intraligamentary stabilization a mean of 14 days after ACL rupture. Fifty-seven patients (96.6%, male:female = 37:20; mean age 27.6 years) were available for follow-up examinations including the Tegner activity level, anteroposterior stability in comparison with the uninjured knee, subjective satisfaction, and range of knee motion. Complications after 3 and 12 months were also analyzed. Associated lesions requiring surgical measures were found in 30 patients.

RESULTS

A statistically significant decrease in Tegner activity levels was detected between the preoperative status (median 7) and the 12-month follow-up (median 5). The overall complication rate was 57.9%, including rerupture or non-healing (n = 10, 17.5%), repeat arthroscopy (n = 13, 22.8%) as a result of meniscus tears (n = 2, 15.4%), cyclops syndrome (n = 4, 30.8%) or restricted range of motion (n = 7, 53.8%), arthrofibrosis (n = 3, 5.3%), and implant interference (n = 7, 12.3%). Anteroposterior KT-1000 stability of 3 mm or below was achieved in 29 (50.9%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The DIS procedure does not appear to be appropriate for providing predictable results in a young and active cohort of patients following ACL rupture, as it has an unacceptably high complication rate and leads to residual anteroposterior knee joint laxity of 3 mm or more in 28 (49.1%) of cases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV (prospective case series).

Improved results of ACL primary repair in one-part tears with intact synovial coverage

PURPOSE

It was the aim to assess the influence of synovial sheath disruption on early failure of primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair. It was hypothesized that more-part ACL tears with disruption of the synovial sheath are associated with a higher risk of failure after primary ACL repair.

METHODS

A cohort study was conducted comprising patients with primal ACL tears undergoing primary ACL repair and dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS). The patients were stratified into three groups: A-one-part rupture with intact synovial membrane (n = 50), B-two-part ruptures resultant to separation of the ACL into two main bundles with synovial membrane tearing (n = 52) and C-more parts involving multilacerated ruptures with membrane disruption (n = 22). Failure was defined as a retear or residual laxity (anterior posterior translation > 5 mm compared to healthy knee). Adjustment for potential risk factors was performed using a multivariate logistic-regression model.

RESULTS

The overall failure rate was 17.7% throughout the mean follow-up period of 2.3 ± 0.8 years. The failure rate in patients with one-part ACL tears with an intact synovial membrane was 4% (n = 2) (Group A), which was significantly lower than the failure rates in groups B and C, 26.9% (n = 14) (p = 0.001) and 27.3% (n = 6) (p = 0.003), respectively. Disruption of the synovial sheath in two- or more-part tears was identified as an independent factor influencing treatment failure in primary ACL repair (OR 8.9; 95% CI 2.0-40.0).

CONCLUSION

The integrity of the ACL bundles and synovial sheath is a factor that influences the success of ACL repair. This needs to be considered intra-operatively when deciding about repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Surgeon experience with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization does not influence risk of failure

PURPOSE

Studies on dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) of acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures reported failure rates similar to those of conventional ACL reconstruction. This study aimed to determine whether surgeon experience with DIS is associated with revision rates or patient-reported outcomes. The hypothesis was that more experienced surgeons achieved better outcomes following DIS due to substantial learning curve.

METHODS

The authors prospectively enrolled 110 consecutive patients that underwent DIS and evaluated them at a minimum of 2 years. The effects of independent variables (surgeon experience, gender, age, adjuvant procedures, tear location, preinjury Tegner score, time from injury to surgery, and follow-up) on four principal outcomes (revision ACL surgery, any re-operation, IKDC and Lysholm score) were analyzed using univariable and multivariable regressions.

RESULTS

From the 110 patients enrolled, 14 patients (13%) were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 96 patients, 11 underwent revision ACL surgery, leaving 85 patients for clinical assessment at a mean of 2.2 ± 0.4 years (range 2.0-3.8). Arthroscopic reoperations were performed in 26 (27%) patients, including 11 (11%) revision ACL surgeries. Multivariable regressions revealed: (1) no associations between the reoperation rate and the independent variables, (2) better IKDC scores for 'designer surgeons' (b = 10.7; CI 4.9-16.5; p < 0.001), higher preinjury Tegner scores (b = 2.5, CI 0.8-4.2; p = 0.005), and younger patients (b = 0.3, CI 0.0-0.6; p = 0.039), and (3) better Lysholm scores for 'designer surgeons' (b = 7.8, CI 2.8-12.8; p = 0.005) and preinjury Tegner score (b = 1.9, CI 0.5-3.4; p = 0.010).

CONCLUSION

Surgeon experience with DIS was not associated with rates of revision ACL surgery or general re-operations. Future, larger-scaled studies are needed to confirm these findings. Patients operated by 'designer surgeons' had slightly better IKDC and Lysholm scores, which could be due to better patient selection and/or positively biased attitudes of both surgeons and patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, prospective comparative study.

Dynamic augmentation restores anterior tibial translation in ACL suture repair: a biomechanical comparison of non-, static and dynamic augmentation techniques

PURPOSE

There is a lack of objective evidence investigating how previous non-augmented ACL suture repair techniques and contemporary augmentation techniques in ACL suture repair restrain anterior tibial translation (ATT) across the arc of flexion, and after cyclic loading of the knee. The purpose of this work was to test the null hypotheses that there would be no statistically significant difference in ATT after non-, static- and dynamic-augmented ACL suture repair, and they will not restore ATT to normal values across the arc of flexion of the knee after cyclic loading.

METHODS

Eleven human cadaveric knees were mounted in a test rig, and knee kinematics from 0° to 90° of flexion were recorded by use of an optical tracking system. Measurements were recorded without load and with 89-N tibial anterior force. The knees were tested in the following states: ACL-intact, ACL-deficient, non-augmented suture repair, static tape augmentation and dynamic augmentation after 10 and 300 loading cycles.

RESULTS

Only static tape augmentation and dynamic augmentation restored ATT to values similar to the ACL-intact state directly postoperation, and maintained this after cyclic loading. However, contrary to dynamic augmentation, the ATT after static tape augmentation failed to remain statistically less than for the ACL-deficient state after cyclic loading. Moreover, after cyclic loading, ATT was significantly less with dynamic augmentation when compared to static tape augmentation.

CONCLUSION

In contrast to non-augmented ACL suture repair and static tape augmentation, only dynamic augmentation resulted in restoration of ATT values similar to the ACL-intact knee and decreased ATT values when compared to the ACL-deficient knee immediately post-operation and also after cyclic loading, across the arc of flexion, thus allowing the null hypotheses to be rejected. This may assist healing of the ruptured ACL. Therefore, this study would support further clinical evaluation of dynamic augmentation of ACL repair.

A Narrative Review of Four Different New Techniques in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair: "Back to the Future" or Another Trend?

Recently, four different operative techniques, referring to the primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair, were described. These are the dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) with Ligamys™, the Bridge-enhanced repair (BEAR), the use of internal brace, and the refixation with suture anchors. The purpose of this study was to assess the already-published, clinical, and pre-clinical results of those techniques. A literature review was conducted and implemented by three independent researchers. Inclusion criteria were clinical or cadaveric or animal studies about patients suffering from ACL rupture, who were treated with one of those four different arthroscopic techniques of primary ACL repair. There were 10 clinical trials dealing with the different techniques of primary ACL repair and 12 cadaveric or animal studies. The majority of the published clinical trials investigated the dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS), while only four studies referred to the three other surgical techniques. Most of the clinical trials suggested that primary ACL repair should be done during the first 14–21 days after a proximal ACL rupture and not later. Further clinical evidence is needed for the techniques of bridge-enhanced ACL repair, internal brace, and suture anchors ACL refixation in order to support the animal and cadaveric biomechanical studies. Till now, the existing clinical trials were not enough to establish the use of those techniques in the ACL-ruptured patients. On the contrary, the Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization with Ligamys™ device demonstrated very promising results in different types of clinical studies.

Self-reported functional recovery after reconstruction versus repair in acute anterior cruciate ligament rupture (ROTOR): a randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is today's surgical gold standard for ACL rupture. Although it provides satisfactory results, not all patients return to their previous activity level and moreover, early posttraumatic osteoarthritis is not prevented. As such, a renewed interest has emerged in ACL suture repair combined with dynamic augmentation. Compared to ACL reconstruction, the hypothesized advantages of ACL suture repair are earlier return to sports, reduction of early posttraumatic osteoarthritis and preservation of the patient's native ACL tissue and proprioceptive envelope of the knee. In recent literature, ACL suture repair combined with dynamic augmentation tends to be at least equally effective compared to ACL reconstruction, but no randomized comparative study has yet been conducted.

METHODS/DESIGN

This study is a prospective, stratified, block randomized controlled trial. Forty-eight patients with an ACL rupture will be assigned to either a suture repair group with dynamic augmentation and microfracture of the femoral notch, or an ACL reconstruction group with autologous semitendinosis graft and all-inside technique. The primary objective is to investigate the hypothesis that suture repair of a ruptured ACL results in at least equal effectiveness compared with an ACL reconstruction in terms of patient self-reported outcomes (IKDC 2000 subjective scale) 1 year postoperatively. Secondary objectives are to evaluate patient self-reported outcomes (IKDC 2000, KOOS, Tegner, VAS), re-rupture rate, rehabilitation time required for return to daily and sports activities, achieved levels of sports activity, clinimetrics (Rolimeter, LSI, Isoforce) and development of osteoarthritis, at short term (6 weeks, 3, 6 and 9 months and 1 year), midterm (2 and 5 years) and long term (10 years) postoperatively.

DISCUSSION

A renewed interest has emerged in ACL suture repair combined with dynamic augmentation in the treatment of ACL rupture. Recent cohort studies show good short- and midterm results for this technique. This randomized controlled trial has been designed to compare the outcome of suture repair of a ruptured ACL, combined with DIS as well as microfracture of the femoral notch, with ACL reconstruction using autologous semitendinosus.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials Register NCT02310854 (retrospectively registered on December 1st, 2014).

Changes in gait pattern and early functional results after ACL repair are comparable to those of ACL reconstruction

PURPOSE

Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) has been introduced as a new technique to repair the torn anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and to restore knee joint kinematics after an acute ACL tear. Aim of the present study was to compare the early post-operative activity, restoration of gait pattern and functional results after DIS in comparison with primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR) for acute ACL tears. It was hypothesized that functional results, post-operative activity and changes in gait pattern after DIS are comparable to those after ACLR.

METHODS

Sixty patients with acute ACL tears were included in this study and underwent either DIS or ACLR with an anatomic semitendinosus autograft in a randomized manner. Patients were equipped with an accelerometric step counter for the first 6 weeks after surgery in order to monitor their early post-operative activity. 3D gait analysis was performed at 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery. Temporal-spatial, kinematic and kinetic parameters were extracted and averaged for each subject. Functional results were recorded at 6 weeks, 6 months and 12 months after surgery using the Tegner activity scale, International Knee Documentation Committee score and Lysholm score.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent DIS showed an increased early post-operative activity with significant differences at week 2 and 3 (p = 0.0241 and 0.0220). No significant differences between groups were found for knee kinematic and kinetic parameters or the functional scores at any time of the follow-up. Furthermore, the difference in anterior tibial translation was not significantly different between the two groups (n.s.).

CONCLUSION

Early functional results and changes in gait pattern after DIS are comparable to those of primary ACLR. Therefore, ACL repair may be an alternative to ACLR in this cohort of patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Cost-utility analysis of dynamic intraligamentary stabilization versus early reconstruction after rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) technique in comparison with reconstructive surgery (ACLR) in the treatment of isolated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures from the perspective of the community of insured citizens in Germany.

METHODS

Because of the specific decision problem at hand, namely that with DIS the procedure has to take place within 21 days after the initial trauma, a decision tree was developed. The time horizon of the model was set to 3 years. Input data was taken from official tariffs, payer data, the literature and assumptions based on expert opinion when necessary.

RESULTS

The decision tree analysis identified the DIS strategy as the superior one with 2.34 QALY versus 2.26 QALY for the ACLR branch. The higher QALY also came with higher costs of 5,398.05 € for the DIS branch versus 4,632.68 € for the ACLR branch respectively, leading to an ICER of 9,092.66 € per QALY. Results were robust after sensitivity analysis. Uncertainty was examined via probabilistic sensitivity analysis resulting in a slightly higher ICER of 9,567.13 € per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

The DIS technology delivers an effective treatment for the ACL rupture at a favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

Collagen application reduces complication rates of mid-substance ACL tears treated with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization

PURPOSE

Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization was recently proposed as an option for the treatment of acute ACL ruptures. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of the procedure in mid-substance ACL ruptures and examine whether the additional application of a bilayer collagen I/III membrane would provide for a superior outcome.

METHODS

The study group consisted of patients presenting with a mid-substance ACL rupture undergoing dynamic intraligamentary stabilization using the Ligamys™ device along with application of a collagen I/III membrane to the surface of the ACL (group A, n = 23). The control group comprised a matched series of patients presenting with a mid-substance ACL rupture also treated by dynamic intraligamentary stabilization Ligamys™ repair, however, without additional collagen application (group B, n = 33). Patients were evaluated preoperatively and at 24-month follow-up for stability as well as Tegner and Lysholm scores. Knee laxity was measured as a difference in anterior translation (ΔAP) and pivot shift. Any events occurring during the follow-up period of 24 months were documented. Logistic regression of complications was performed, and adjustment undertaken where necessary.

RESULTS

A high total complication rate of 78.8 % was noted in group B, compared to group A (8.7 %) (p = 0.002). The addition of a collagen membrane was the only independent prognostic factor associated with reduced complications (OR 8.0, CI 2.0-32.2, p = 0.003, for collagen-free treatment). In group B, 6 patients suffered a re-rupture with subsequent instability requiring secondary hamstring reconstruction surgery, and 11 developed extension loss requiring arthroscopic debridement, whilst in group A, 2 patients required arthroscopic debridement for loss of exension, with no further encountered complication. Median Lysholm score was significantly higher in group A compared to group B (median 100 range 93-100 vs median 95 range 60-100, p = 0.03) at final follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

A high complication rate following ACL Ligamys™ repair of mid-substance ruptures was noted. Application of a collagen membrane to the surface of the ACL resulted in a reduced incidence of extension deficit and re-ruptures. The results indicate that solitary ACL Ligamys™ repair does not present an appropriate treatment modality for mid-substance ACL ruptures. Collage application proved to provide healing benefits with superior clinical outcome after ACL repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Case control study, Level III.

Knee joint kinematics with dynamic augmentation of primary anterior cruciate ligament repair - a biomechanical study

Background

Dynamic augmentation of anterior cruciate ligament tears seems to reduce anteroposterior knee translation close to the pre-injury level. The aim of the present study is to biomechanically investigate the course of translation during a simulated early post-operative phase. It is hypothesized that anteroposterior translation is maintained at the immediate post-operative level over a simulated rehabilitation period of 50’000 gait cycles.

Methods

Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric knee joints from donors with a mean age of 35.5 (range 25–40) years were subjected to 50’000 cycles of 0°-70°-0° flexion-extension movements in a custom-made test setup. Anteroposterior translation was assessed with simulated Lachman/KT-1000 testing in 0°, 15°, 30°, 60° and 90° of flexion in knee joints treated with the novel technique initially and after 50’000 cycles testing. Statistical analysis was performed using the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test. The level of significance was set at p = 0.05.

Results

Anteroposterior translation changed non-significantly for all flexion angles between cycle 0 and 50’000 (p = 0.39 to p = 0.89), except for 30° flexion, where a significant increase by 1.4 mm was found (p = 0.03).

Conclusion

Increase in anteroposterior translation of knees treated with this dynamic augmentation procedure is low. The procedure maintains translation close to the immediate post-operative level over a simulated rehabilitation period of 50’000 gait cycles and therefore supports anterior cruciate ligament repair during biological healing.

Five year results of the first ten ACL patients treated with dynamic intraligamentary stabilisation

Background

In recent years, the scientific discussion has focused on new strategies to enable a torn anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) to heal into mechanically stable scar tissue. Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) with LigamysTM was first performed in a pilot study of 10 patients. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the five year results of this group.

Methods

Inclusion criteria were an ACL rupture not older than 14 days, patient age <45 years, no previous surgery on the injured knee, and regular participation in sports requiring pivoting of the knee joint. Ten consecutive patients (eight males, two females) underwent surgery between August 2009 and February 2010. They were treated by DIS employing an internal stabilizer to keep the unstable knee in a posterior translation, combined with microfracturing and platelet-rich fibrin induction at the rupture site to promote self-healing. Postoperative clinical outcome [Tegner, Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), visual analogue scale patient satisfaction score] and assessment of knee laxity was performed at 3, 6, 12, 24 and 60 months.

Results

Median patient age at time of surgery was 23.3 years (range 19–41 years). The median time to surgery was 10 days (range 5–13 days). The rupture was located in the middle third of the ligament in seven patients and in the proximal third in three patients. Eight patients showed additional meniscal lesions, which were surgically treated in six patients. Eight of the ten patients reached the five-years follow-up. Median Lysholm score was 100 (range 90–100); the IKDC score was 98.9 (range 79.3–100); Tegner score was 5.5 (range 5–7); median Lachman difference to the other side was 2 mm (range 0–4 mm). Median patient satisfaction was 10 points (range 8–10 pts.). Four of the ten patients underwent metal removal (tibial implant component) after ACL healing and a consequently stable knee joint. Two patients suffered from a re-rupture at 5 months and 4.2 years after surgery and were treated with a bone-tendon-bone ACL graft.

Conclusions

Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization in ten active patients with a fresh ACL rupture showed a 5-years survival rate of 80 %. At the last follow-up all patients with a functionally healed ACL showed excellent outcomes and satisfaction with regards to the treatment result.