Similar cost-utility for double- and single-bundle techniques in ACL reconstruction

Femoral Tunnel Position in Anatomical Double-bundle ACL Reconstruction is not Affected by Blumensaat's Line Morphology

The aim of this study was to reveal the influence of the morphological variations of the Blumensaat's line on anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) femoral tunnel position in anatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.Fifty-three subjects undergoing anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction were included (29 female, 24 male; median age 27.4 years; range: 14-50 years). Using an inside-out transportal technique, the PL tunnel position was made on a line drawn vertically from the bottommost point of the lateral condyle at 90 degrees of knee flexion, spanning a distance of 5 to 8 mm, to the edge of the joint cartilage. AM tunnel position was made 2 mm distal to the PL tunnel position. Following Iriuchishima's classification, the morphology of the Blumensaat's line was classified into straight and hill (large and small) types. Femoral tunnel position was determined using the quadrant method. A Mann-Whitney U test was performed to compare straight and hill type knees according to AM and PL femoral tunnel position.There were 18 straight and 35 hill type knees (13 small and 22 large hill). AM and PL femoral tunnel position in straight type knees were 21.7 ± 7.0 and 33.6 ± 10.5% in the shallow-deep direction, and 42.1 ± 11.1 and 72.1 ± 8.5% in the high-low direction, respectively. In hill type knees, AM and PL femoral tunnel position were 21.3 ± 5.8 and 36.9 ± 7.1% in the shallow-deep direction, and 44.6 ± 10.7 and 72.1 ± 9.7% in the high-low direction, respectively. No significant difference in AM or PL femoral tunnel position was detected between straight and hill type knees.AM and PL femoral tunnel position in anatomical double-bundle ACL reconstruction was not affected by the morphological variations of the Blumensaat's line. Surgeons do not need to consider Blumensaat's line morphology if AM and PL femoral tunnel position is targeted at the bottommost point of the lateral condyle. This was a level of evidence III study.

Financial burden of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions in football (soccer) players: an Australian cost of injury study

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the financial burden of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions in amateur football (soccer) players in Australia over a single year, including both direct and indirect cost.

METHODS

Available national direct and indirect cost data were applied to the annual incidence of ACL reconstructions in Australia. Age-adjusted and sex-adjusted total and mean costs (ACL and osteoarthritis (OA)) were calculated for amateur football (soccer) players in Australia using an incidence-based approach.

RESULTS

The estimated cost of ACL reconstructions for amateur football players is $A69 623 211 with a mean total cost of $A34 079. The mean indirect costs are 19.8% higher than the mean direct costs. The mean indirect costs are lower in female (11.5%, $A28 628) and junior (15.3%, $A29 077) football players. The mean ACL costs are 3-4-fold greater than the mean OA costs ($A27 099 vs $A6450, respectively), remaining consistent when stratified by sex and age group. Our model suggests that for every 10% increase in adherence to injury prevention programmes, which equates to approximately 102 less ACL injuries per year, $A9 460 224 in ACL costs could be saved.

CONCLUSION

While the number of ACL reconstructions per year among football players in Australia is relatively small, the annual financial burden is high. Our study suggests that if injury prevention exercises programmes are prioritised by stakeholders in football, significant cost-savings are possible.

Current development in surgical techniques, graft selection and additional procedures for anterior cruciate ligament injury: a path towards anatomic restoration and improved clinical outcomes-a narrative review

Background and Objective

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been widely used for ACL injury for a long time. However, residual rotational instability and osteoarthritic changes after ACL reconstruction have been identified as problems. Thus, anatomic reconstruction techniques, various types of grafts and additional procedures have been desired to improve the clinical outcomes and knee instability. Although clinical outcomes and knee stability are better than in the past, ipsilateral graft failures still occur in 4-17% and osteoarthritic changes are seen in about 20% of patients after ACL reconstruction. To remedy these problems, it is necessary to improve the understanding of various surgical techniques and grafts and to pursue further improvement of surgical techniques. Therefore, the objective of this review is to summarize the advantages and disadvantages of various surgical techniques and graft selection, and additional procedures for ACL injury.

Methods

A literature review was conducted on the surgical procedures for ACL injury. Recent trends in surgical techniques, graft selection, and additional procedures for ACL injury were described. We performed a literature search in PubMed for studies published from origin to May 8, 2023. Studies were required to be English-language articles.

Key Content and Findings

Although many reports indicate that double-bundle ACL reconstruction is comparable to anatomic single-bundle (SB) reconstruction, intraoperative complications such as tunnel coalition exist in double-bundle reconstruction, and the technique needs to be improved. ACL repair has shown good short-term results, but long-term results need to be examined in the future. Quadriceps tendon autograft is being used more frequently, but hamstrings tendon autograft and bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft also have good results. In addition, in higher-risk cases, lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction can be performed with good results.

Conclusions

To further improve clinical outcomes, more anatomical reconstructions should be pursued. Autografts are better than allografts and synthetic grafts, but further study is needed to determine which graft is better. Additional procedures should be performed in highly unstable cases and in revision cases.

Knee- and Overall Health-Related Quality of Life Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: A Cross-sectional Analysis of Australian and Canadian Cohorts

OBJECTIVE: To describe the knee- and overall health-related quality of life (QOL) 3 to 12 years after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear, and to assess the association of clinical and structural features with QOL after ACL tear. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of combined data from Australian (n = 76, 5.4 years postinjury) and Canadian (n = 50, 6.6 years postinjury) prospective cohort studies. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of patient-reported outcomes and index knee magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) acquired in 126 patients (median 5.5 [range: 4-12] years postinjury), all treated with ACL reconstruction. Outcomes included knee (ACL Quality of Life questionnaire [ACL-QOL]) and overall health-related QOL (EQ-5D-3L). Explanatory variables were self-reported knee pain (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS-Pain subscale]) and function (KOOS-Sport subscale), and any knee cartilage lesion (MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score). Generalized linear models were adjusted for clustering between sites. Covariates were age, sex, time since injury, injury type, subsequent knee injuries, and body mass index. RESULTS: The median [range] ACL-QOL score was 82 [24-100] and EQ-5D-3L was 1.0 [-0.2 to 1.0]. For every 10-point higher KOOS-Sport score, the ACL-QOL score increased by 3.7 points (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7, 5.7), whereas there was no evidence of an association with the EQ-5D-3L (0.00 points, 95% CI: -0.02, 0.02). There were no significant association between KOOS-Pain and ACL-QOL (4.9 points, 95% CI: -0.1, 9.9) or EQ-5D-3L (0.05 points, 95% CI: -0.01, 0.11), respectively. Cartilage lesions were not associated with ACL-QOL (-1.2, 95% CI: -5.1, 2.7) or EQ-5D-3L (0.01, 95% CI: -0.01, 0.04). CONCLUSION: Self-reported function was more relevant for knee-related QOL than knee pain or cartilage lesions after ACL tear. Self-reported function, pain, and knee structural changes were not associated with overall health-related QOL. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(7):1-12. Epub: 8 June 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11838.

Long-term quality of life, work limitation, physical activity, economic cost and disease burden following ACL and meniscal injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis for the OPTIKNEE consensus

OBJECTIVE

Determine the long-term health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL), work limitation, physical activity, health/economic cost and disease burden of traumatic ACL and/or meniscal injury. Findings will inform OPTIKNEE evidence-based consensus recommendations.

DESIGN

Random-effects meta-analysis evaluated HRQoL (SF-36/SF-12/VR-12 Physical Component Scores (PCS) and Mental Component Scores (MCS), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D)) stratified by time postinjury, and pooled mean differences (95% CI) between ACL-injured and uninjured controls. Other outcomes were synthesised descriptively. Risk-of-bias (RoB) and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) were assessed.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL searched inception: 22 November 2021.

ELIGIBILITY

Studies reporting HRQoL, work limitations, physical activity levels, health/economic costs or disease burden, ≥2 years post-ACL and/or meniscal injury.

RESULTS

Fifty studies were included (10 high-RoB, 28 susceptible-to-some-bias and 12 low-RoB). Meta-analysis (27 studies, very low certainty of evidence) estimated a pooled mean (95% CI) PCS of 52.4 (51.4 to 53.4) and MCS of 54.0 (53.0 to 55.0) 2-14 years post-ACL injury. Pooled PCS scores were worse >10 years (50.8 (48.7 to 52.9)) compared with 2-5 years (53.9 (53.1 to 54.7)) postinjury. Excluding high-RoB studies, PCS scores were worse in ACL-injured compared with uninjured controls (-1.5 (-2.9 to -0.1)). Six studies (low certainty of evidence) informed a pooled EQ-5D score of 0.83 (0.81 to 0.84). Some individuals experienced prolonged work absenteeism and modified activities ≥2 years post-ACL injury. ACL injury was associated with significant direct and indirect costs, and early ACL reconstruction may be less cost-effective than rehabilitation. Only three studies evaluated meniscal injury outcomes (all evaluated HRQoL).

CONCLUSION

There is a very-low certainty of evidence that PCS scores ≥2 years post-ACL injury are worse than uninjured controls and decline over time, whereas MCS scores remain high. ACL injury can result in prolonged work absenteeism and high health/economic costs. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term burden of traumatic meniscal injury.

Radiological maturation and clinical results of double-bundle and single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A 5-year prospective case-controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to make a prospective comparison of the radiological and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHOD

This prospective, case-controlled study included 65 patients, separated into 2 groups as 33 patients undergoing single bundle (SB), and 32 patients undergoing double bundle (DB) ACL reconstruction. The patients were evaluated clinically using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and the Lysholm knee scores. Stability was evaluated with the KT-1000 Arthrometer Measurement, the Lachman and pivot shift tests. Magnetic resonance images (MRI) at 1 and 5 years postoperatively were evaluated by a musculoskeletal radiologist. All the operations were performed by a single surgeon and the clinical evaluations were made by an independent researcher.

RESULTS

Evaluation was made of a total of 53 patients (SB: 28, DB: 25). No statistically significant difference was determined between the groups regarding the postoperative IKDC and Lysholm scores. The pivot shift tests were negative in the DB group and positive in two patients of the SB group. The Lachman test was negative in all the patients. No significant difference was determined between the groups. No statistically significant difference was determined between the two groups in respect of the arthrometer measurements. In the SB group, revision surgery was performed in two patients due to graft failure. No graft failure findings were determined in the DB group, and no statistically significant difference was determined between the groups in respect of graft failure. On the MRIs taken at 1 year postoperatively, the ACL was seen to be hyperintense in 16 patients in the DB group and 6 patients in the SB group (p = 0.004). On the 5-year MRIs, ACL hypointensity could not be seen in three patients of the SB group and two of the DB group, with no difference determined between the groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In the 5-year follow-up period, no difference was determined between patients undergoing SB ACL reconstruction and those undergoing DB ACL reconstruction regarding clinical scores, knee stability, and MRI findings, but graft maturation occurs later the patients undergoing DB reconstruction.

Comparison between single- and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions for knee with grade 2 medial collateral ligament injury

This research discussed clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction accompanied by conservative treatment for grade 2 medial collateral ligament injury, and comparison was performed between double-bundle and single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.Clinical information was retrospectively collected for 41 cases suffering anterior cruciate ligament injuries accompanied by grade 2 medial collateral ligament injuries. Within 14 days after their injuries 22 cases received single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (SB group), while 19 were treated with double-bundle medial collateral ligament reconstruction (DB group). Physical statuses were estimated based on International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm scores, Lachman, pivot shift and manual valgus test, and range of motion (ROM), while side-to-side difference was estimated through KT 2000 arthometer.Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction accompanied by conservative treatment showed significantly improved anteroposterior, rotational and valgus stability, and IKDC and Lysholm scores (in comparison to pre-operative status, P < .05). Incidence of pivot shift was dramatically lower in DB group (2/19) than in SB group (7/22 and 2/22; P = .028). No substantial dissimilarity existed between DB and SB groups either in Lachman and valgus tests, KT 2000, ROM, IKDC, or Lysholm scores.Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction accompanied by conservative treatment could achieve outstanding stability and functional manifestations for cases facing anterior cruciate ligament injury accompanied by grade 2 medial collateral ligament injury. Moreover, double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is superior to single-bundle operation in treating rotational instability of the knee.Level of evidence: Retrospective comparative study, Level III.

The single-suture technique for anterior cruciate ligament graft preparation provides similar stability as a three-suture technique: a biomechanical in vitro study in a porcine model

PURPOSE

Numerous techniques have been described for the tibial-sided graft preparation in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The use of less suture material for graft preparation is thought to improve ingrowth and to reduce the risk for infection. At the same time, the suture construct should be strong enough to resist the surgeon's pull during tensioning of the transplant.

METHODS

In total, 39 fresh-frozen procine deep flexor tendons were used and prepared as four-strand grafts. In the three-suture group (n = 19), graft preparation was performed using three tibial-sided sutures, with each tendon end sutured separately. In the one-suture group (n = 20), a modified graft preparation using only one tibial-sided suture was applied. Each sample underwent load-to-failure testing (N_max) after cyclic pre-loading. To estimate intraoperative tension forces acting on the tibial-sided suture constructs, the maximal tension force of 26 volunteers on such a construct was measured using a load cell.

RESULTS

The biomechanical testing of the two different suture constructs showed a significantly higher load-to-failure for the three-suture group (711 N ± 91 N) compared to the one-suture group (347 N ± 24 N) (p = 0.0001). In both groups, the mode of failure was a tear of the suture in all samples. A failure of the suture-tendon interface was not observed in any case. The median maximal tension force on the construct applied by the 26 volunteers was 134 N (range 73-182 N).

CONCLUSION

The presented single-suture tendon graft preparation resisted to smaller failure loads than the conventional three-suture technique. However, no failures in the suture-tendon interface were seen and the failure loads observed were far beyond the tension forces that can be expected intraoperatively. Hence, the single-suture graft preparation technique may be a valuable alternative to the conventional technique.

Long term results after double and single bundle ACL reconstruction: Is there any difference? A meta - analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective

The double-bundle (DB) techniques are considered to yield better stability of the knee compared with single-bundle (SB) for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, most studies followed up patients in short to middle-term within 5 years, and the longer-term efficacy of SB and DB ACL reconstruction is still beyond consensus. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the longer-term efficacy between double-bundle (DB) and single-bundle (SB) techniques.

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant articles published up to November, 2017 with an English language restriction. The searches were limited to human subjects and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In addition, the reference lists of identified articles were checked manually to avoid missing other potentially eligible studies. This process was performed iteratively until no additional articles could be included. The quality of the included studies was assessed using The Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. All statistical analyses were performed with Review Manager soft-ware.

Results

A total of five RCTs involving 294 patients were included finally. No studies were excluded due to insufficient data or low quality. The pooled results showed no statistically significant difference between SB and double bundle DB reconstructions for Lysholm, IKDC, pivot shift, KT scores, and the development of osteoarthritis at a minimum of 5 years. No significant heterogeneity was found across all outcomes.

Conclusion

The best available evidence demonstrated that SB and DB techniques could yield similar efficacy for ACL reconstruction. And no superiority was founded in DB ACL reconstruction with a minimal 5-year follow-up. Given that, the relatively simple and proven techniques of SB ACL reconstruction may be preferable for orthopedic surgeons.

Level of evidence: Level I, Therapeutic Study.

Anterolateral Complex Reconstruction: Another Fad or Method to Improve ACL Outcomes?

Anterolateral rotational laxity of the knee is a persistent problem following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) that can lead to increased rates of graft failure. Renewed interest in the anterolateral complex of the knee has led to a resurgence in the use of adjunctive techniques such as lateral extra-articular tenodesis and anterolateral ligament reconstruction. Use of these techniques can restore normal knee kinematics and potentially thereby reduce the rate of graft failure. Historically, experience with modified ACLR techniques such as the double-bundle ACLR have shown that improved biomechanics is not always reflected in clinical outcome trials. Additional procedures also come with additional costs and further economic analysis needs to be performed to clarify whether these additional costs are offset by improved clinical and societal outcomes in the longer-term.