Re-revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction showed more laxity than revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at a minimum 2-year follow-up

Inconsistent Return to Sport Despite Improved Outcomes After Re-revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: An Updated Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature evaluating patient-reported outcomes and return to sport after re-revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) procedures. The secondary objectives were 2-fold: to identify the risk factors that lead to revision ACLR failure and to assess the secondary knee structure injuries after the initial revision ACLR.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed using the MEDLINE/PubMed and Cochrane databases. The inclusion criteria were outcomes of re-revision ACLR, minimum of 2 years' follow-up, human studies, and English language. Basic science articles, epidemiologic studies, editorials, surgical technique articles, surveys, cadaveric studies, and animal studies were excluded.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were considered for review. There were 6 Level III and 9 Level IV studies that included 399 patients undergoing re-revision ACLR. The rate of concomitant meniscal lesions at the time of re-revision ranged from 35% to 90%. The prevalence of concomitant cartilaginous lesions at the time of re-revision ranged from 13.6% to 90%. Compared with preoperative scores, patient-reported outcomes overall improved after re-revision ACLR, with mean preoperative Lysholm scores ranging from 38.4 to 73.15 that improved to postoperative scores ranging from 68 to 87.8. However, return to sport at preinjury levels was inconsistent, with rates ranging from 12.5% to 80%.

CONCLUSIONS

Re-revision ACLR was found to restore knee stability and improve functional outcomes. Despite this improvement, there was a low rate of return to sport at the preinjury level. Functional outcomes were also inferior when compared with primary ACLR. In addition, concomitant knee pathologies were found to rise in prevalence compared with revision and primary ACLR cases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Around-the-knee osteotomies part 1: definitions, rationale and planning-state of the art

Knee osteotomies are essential orthopedic procedures with the ability to preserve the joint and correct ligament instabilities. Literature supports the correlation between lower limb malalignment and outcomes after knee ligament reconstruction and cartilage procedures. Concepts such as joint line obliquity, posterior tibial slope angle, and intra-articular deformity correction are integral components of both preoperative planning and postoperative evaluations. The concept of preserving and/or restoring joint line congruence during simultaneous correction of varus or valgus deformity can be achieved through several different approaches. With advancements in osteotomy research and surgical planning technology, the surgical decision-making has increased in complexity. Based upon a patient's specific deformity, decisions need to be made whether to perform a single-level (proximal tibia or distal femur) versus double-level (both proximal tibia and distal femur) osteotomy, and whether to correct deformity in a single plane (coronal or sagittal) or perform a biplanar osteotomy, correcting two of the malalignments in either coronal, sagittal, or axial planes. Osteotomy procedures prioritize safety, reproducibility, precision, and meticulous planning. Equally important is the proactive management of possible complications and the implementation of preventive strategies for complications such as hinge fractures and unintentional changes to alignment in other planes. This review navigates the intricate landscape of lower limb alignment, commencing with foundational definitions and rationale for performing osteotomies, progressing through the planning phase, and addressing the critical aspect of complication prevention, all while looking ahead to anticipate future advancements in this field. However, rotational osteotomies and tibial tubercle osteotomies in isolation or as an adjunct procedure are beyond the scope of this review.

Nonoperative Treatment for Traumatic Partial Graft Rupture After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A 2-Year Follow-up Study

Background

There are no studies on the nonoperative treatment of traumatic partial anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft rupture.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes and failure rates between nonoperative treatment and revision ACL reconstruction for traumatic partial ACL graft rupture. We hypothesized that the outcomes and failure rates would be comparable and that nonoperative treatment of traumatic partial ACL graft rupture can produce satisfactory outcomes.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 2114 patients treated for isolated ACL rupture between January 2000 and June 2020. Patients with traumatic partial graft rupture after ACL reconstruction with minimum 2-year follow-up data were included. Patients who met all the following conditions were candidates for nonoperative treatment: (1) Lachman or pivot-shift grade 0 or 1 at 6 months after ACL reconstruction, (2) ACL graft with low to intermediate signal intensity on 1-year postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and (3) MRI after reinjury showing definite evidence of trauma, some fibers remaining in continuity of the ACL graft, and no anterior tibial subluxation in the sagittal plane. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to treatment method: nonoperative treatment (group A) and revision ACL reconstruction (group B). Clinical scores, laxity test results, radiological outcomes, and graft failures were compared between the groups.

Results

In total, 47 patients had traumatic partial graft rupture (group A, n = 10; group B, n = 37). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of clinical scores, laxity tests, radiological outcomes, or graft failure.

Conclusion

The clinical and radiological outcomes of nonoperative treatment of traumatic partial graft rupture after ACL reconstruction were comparable with those of revision ACL reconstruction. Nonoperative treatment of traumatic partial ACL graft rupture can produce satisfactory outcomes in selected patients.

Good stability and mid-term subjective outcomes after repeated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision surgery using allografts

PURPOSE

To evaluate the mid-term clinical outcomes of a cohort of patients who underwent multiple ACL revision reconstructions. The hypothesis was that patients with pre-existing meniscal deficiency conditions, malalignment and cartilage degeneration would have obtained lower results.

METHODS

All cases of multiple ACL revisions performed with allograft tissue at one single sport-medicine institution were extracted and patients with a minimum 2 years of follow-up were included. WOMAC, Lhysolm, IKDC, and Tegner activity level before the injury and at last follow-up was collected and laxity evaluated with KT-1000 arthrometer and KiRA triaxial accelerometer.

RESULTS

From a cohort of 241 ACL revisions, 28 patients (12%) with Repeated ACL Revision reconstructions were included. Fourteen cases (50%) were considered "Complex" due to the addition of meniscal allograft transplantation (8) or meniscal scaffold (3) or high tibial osteotomy (3). The remaining 14 cases (50%) were considered as "Isolate". The mean WOMAC score was 84.6 ± 11.4, Lysholm 81.7 ± 12.3, subjective IKDC 77.2 ± 12.1, and median Tegner score 6 (IQR 5-6) at pre-injury and at final follow-up. Statistically significant inferior values of WOMAC (p = 0.008), Lysholm (p = 0.02) and Subjective IKDC (p = 0.0193) were detected between "Complex" and "Isolate" revision groups. Higher average values of anterior translation at KT-1000 at both 125 N (p = 0.03) and manual maximum displacement test (p = 0.03) were reported in "Complex" with respect to "Isolate" revisions. Four patients were considered as failures and occurred in patients with "Complex" revisions, none occurred in the "Isolate" (30% vs 0%; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Good mid-term clinical results can be obtained after repeated ACL revision with allograft in patients who experienced multiple failures; however, those who need additional procedure due to malalignment or post-meniscectomy syndrome reported lower objective and subjective results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Multiple revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: not the best but still good

PURPOSE

Given the paucity of literature on the re-revision of ACL, the current study was undertaken. The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesise and qualitatively assess the currently available evidence in the literature regarding the re-revision of ACL reconstruction (rrACLR).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted based on the PRISMA guidelines. The following search terms were used in the title, abstract and keywords fields: "ACL" or "anterior cruciate ligament" AND "revision" or "multiple" or "repeat". The outcome data extracted from the studies were the Lysholm score, Subjective IKDC, Marx Score, Tegner, Marx Score, KOOS score, radiological changes and the rate of return to sports. Complications, failures and/or revision surgery were also analysed.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 295 patients [191 (64.7%) men and 104 (35.3%) women] with a mean age of 29.9 ± 2.8 years (range 14-58 years) from 10 studies. The mean postoperative follow-up (reported in all studies except one) was 66.9 ± 44.7 months (range 13-230.4 months). Associated injuries were 103 (34.9%) medial meniscus tears, 57 (19.3%) lateral meniscus tears, 14 (4.7%) combined medial plus lateral meniscus tears, 11 (3.7%) meniscal tears (not specified), 252 (85.4%) cartilage lesions, 6 (2.0%) medial collateral ligament injury and 2 (0.7%) lateral collateral ligament injuries. In 47 (15.9%) patients an extra-articular plasty was performed for the anterolateral ligament. In all studies that reported pre- and post-operative IKDC (subjective and objective) and Lysholm score, there was a significant improvement compared to the pre-operative value (p < 0.05). At the final follow-up, laxity measured with KT-1000 was found to be 2.2 ± 0.6 mm. 31 (10.5%) out of 295 patients returned to their pre-injury activity level. A total of 19 (6.4%) re-ruptures were found, while only 4 (1.4%) complications (all minors) were reported, out of which 2 (0.7%) were superficial infections, 1 (0.3%) cyclops lesion and 1 (0.3%) flexion loss.

CONCLUSION

Multiple revisions of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction allow acceptable clinical results and a good degree of knee stability with a low rate of subsequent new re-ruptures but the possibility of regaining pre-injury sports activity is poor; whenever possible, it is preferred to revise the ligament in one stage. This surgery remains a challenge for orthopaedic surgeons and many doubts persist regarding the ideal grafts, additional extra-articular procedures and techniques to use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO-CRD42022352164 ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ ).

Revision Soft-Tissue Allograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Associated With Lower Patient-Reported Outcomes Compared With Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Patients Aged 40 and Older

PURPOSE

To evaluate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and graft failure rates in revision allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in patients aged 40 and older and compare them with primary ACLRs.

METHODS

Patients aged 40 and older who underwent arthroscopic soft-tissue allograft ACLR between 2005 and 2016 with a minimum 2-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were grouped based on revision versus primary ACLR. The rate of achieving an International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) score was recorded. Patient satisfaction, PROs, and graft failure were compared between groups using the χ² test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

We identified 32 patients who underwent revision ACLR and 201 patients who underwent primary ACLR aged 40 and older who met inclusion criteria with a mean follow-up of 6.2 and 6.9 years, respectively (P = .042). There was a lower rate of concomitant meniscal repair in the primary ACLR group (6% vs 21.9%, P = .007) There were no other differences in chondral injuries, mechanism of injury, or meniscal injuries between groups. The median IKDC score was greater in the primary ACLR group as compared with the revision ACLR group (83.9 vs 70.6, P < .001). Patients who underwent revision ACLR were less likely to achieve the IKDC PASS threshold (82.5% vs 56.3%, P = .001) and were less likely to report satisfaction as compared with patients who underwent primary ACLR (90.5% vs 78.1%, P =.038). No difference in graft failure rates was identified between groups (8% vs 15.6%, P = .180).

CONCLUSIONS

Revision allograft ACLR in patients aged 40 and older was associated with lower PROs compared with primary ACLR. Patients who underwent revision ACLR failed to meet the IKDC PASS threshold more often and were dissatisfied with procedure results more than twice as often as patients that underwent primary ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective cohort study.

Editorial Commentary: Autograft, Early Surgery, 2-Stage Surgery for 1 cm of Tunnel Widening or Greater, and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction or Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis May Improve Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision Surgery

Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a challenging procedure. Results are less satisfactory than those of primary ACLR owing to bone defects, altered anatomic landmarks, and concomitant injuries. Modifiable factors such as autograft, early surgery, 2-stage surgery for 1 cm of tunnel widening or greater, and anterolateral ligament reconstruction or lateral extra-articular tenodesis may improve outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament revision surgery. Finally, it is important to consider patients' expectations after revision ACLR when counseling patients and making surgical decisions.

Association of Elevated Posterior Tibial Slope With Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Graft Failure in a Matched Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Elevated posterior tibial slope (PTS) has been identified as an important risk factor in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries and ACL graft failures. The cutoff value to recommend treatment with slope-reducing osteotomy remains unclear and is based on expert opinion and small case series.

PURPOSE

(1) To determine whether there is a difference in PTS shown on lateral knee radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans in a group of patients who experienced revision ACL graft failure versus a control group of patients who underwent successful revision ACL reconstruction, (2) to identify cutoff values of PTS measurements that predict risk of revision ACL graft failure, and (3) to examine whether there is a correlation between radiographic and MRI measurements of PTS.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A total of 38 patients who experienced revision ACL graft failure were identified from a revision ACL database. These patients were matched 1:1 by age, sex, and graft type to a group of 38 control patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction with no evidence of graft failure at a minimum 2 years of follow-up. Medial and lateral PTS were measured by lateral knee radiographs and MRI scans of the affected limb. Demographics, surgical characteristics, and PTS were compared between the groups. The optimal cutoff values of medial and lateral PTS per radiographs and MRI scans for predicting increased risk of revision ACL graft failure were determined by receiver operating characteristic curves. Conditional multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the relative contribution of PTS cutoff values as a predictor of revision graft failure.

RESULTS

The mean PTS values in the failure group were significantly higher than those in the control group on radiographs (medial, 13.2°± 2.9° vs 10.3°± 2.9°; P < .001; lateral, 12.9°± 3.0° vs 9.8°± 2.8°; P < .001) and MRI scans (medial, 7.2°± 3.1° vs 4.8°± 2.9°; P < .001; lateral, 8.4 ± 3.1° vs 5.9 ± 3.0°; P < .001). A radiographic medial PTS ≥14° had the highest increased risk of revision ACL graft failure with sensitivity equal to 50% and specificity to 92.1% (odds ratio, 18.71; 95% CI, 2.0-174.9; P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Elevated PTS was a significant risk factor for revision ACL graft failure. Patients with radiographic medial PTS ≥14° had 18.7-times increased risk of revision ACL failure.

Functional results of multiple revision anterior cruciate ligament with anterolateral tibial tunnel associated with anterolateral ligament reconstruction

Background

Revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions are usually complex owing to previous tunnels. The objective of this study is to report the results of a revision ACL reconstruction technique with a tibial tunnel performed from the anterolateral plateau associated with an anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction.

Methods

Patients with at least two ACL reconstructions that failed and who had significant enlargement and confluence of tunnels in the medial tibial plateau and underwent revision ACL reconstruction associated with ALL reconstruction with the tibial tunnel for the ACL performed from the lateral plateau between 2017 and 2019 were evaluated. All patients were evaluated by physical examination, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Lysholm functional scales.

Results

Six patients who underwent this surgical procedure were evaluated. All patients were sports practitioners and presented a grade 3 pivot shift. The mean age was 28.5 ± 8.2 years, and the mean follow-up time was 34.1 ± 12.8 months. No patient had a new graft rupture, but three (50%) had grade 1 pivot shift. Four patients had minor complications with no clinical impact on the final result. All except one patient were able to return to pre-injury type of sports, at a mean time of 14.6 ± 2.3 months after surgery.

Conclusion

The anterolateral tibial tunnel technique using an Achilles tendon allograft for revision ACL reconstruction after multiple failures associated with an ALL reconstruction showed good results and no major complications. The anterolateral tunnel can be considered a good alternative in cases of medial tibial confluence or significant enlargement of the medial tunnels in re-revision procedures.

Return to Sport After Revision ACL Reconstruction: A Comparative Cohort Study of Outcomes After Single- Versus Multiple-Revision Surgeries

BACKGROUND

The return-to-sport rate at 2 years after multiple-revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions has not been evaluated.

HYPOTHESIS

It was hypothesized that patients who undergo multiple-revision ACL reconstructions would have a lower return-to-sport rate at 2 years after surgery than those who undergo a single-revision reconstruction. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that the multiple-revision group would have lower functional scores.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A single-center cohort study in patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction was begun in 2012. This study included 2 groups: Patients who underwent a single revision, and those who underwent multiple revisions. The main evaluation criterion was the return to sport at the 2-year follow-up. The secondary criteria were the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Lysholm, and ACL-Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI) functional knee scores at the 1- and 2-year follow-ups.

RESULTS

A total of 322 patients (single-revision group: n = 302; multiple-revision group: n = 20) were included. A significant difference in the percentage of patients who stopped all sports activity was found between the 2 groups at 2 years (single-revision group: 19.4%; multiple-revision group: 50%). The return-to-sport rate at the same or lower level of performance was higher in the single-revision group as well (17% vs 14.3% for return at the same level; 45.6% vs 14.3% for return at a lower level; P = .03). At the 2-year follow-up, the functional scores of the single-revision group were significantly higher those than in the multiple-revision group: IKDC (77.7 ± 13.82 vs 64.79 ± 15.22; P < .001), KOOS (72.66 ± 17.63 vs 52.5 ± 15.64; P < .001), Lysholm (84.05 ± 11.88 vs 72.5 ± 13.49; P < .001), and ACL-RSI (52.34 ± 21.83 vs 46.43 ± 14.8; P = .0036).

CONCLUSION

Only a small percentage of patients returned to the same level of sport after single- revision and multiple-revision ACL reconstruction, yet significantly more in the former. More patients who underwent multiple revisions gave up their sport. Functional scores were higher for single-revision than multiple-revision surgeries.

Risk factors of cartilage lesion after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Anterior cruciate ligament injury is the most common sports injury in orthopaedics, which can adversely affect knee joint function and exercise of patients. Using arthroscopy to reconstruct the anterior cruciate ligament has become the first choice for treating anterior cruciate ligament rupture. However, different degrees of articular cartilage injury of the knee can be observed in patients after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. More importantly, the articular cartilage injury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction indicates that it will develop into osteoarthritis in the long term. It is of great significance to fully understand the factors that lead to the occurrence and development of cartilage injury. This article reviews the effects of surgical methods, meniscus status, different grafts, time from injury to surgical intervention, postoperative knee joint stability, postoperative rehabilitation, knee joint anatomical factors, and demographic characteristics of patients on articular cartilage degeneration after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The present review provides insights into the anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, which can be used to investigate new treatment strategies to delay and prevent the progress of osteoarthritis. At the same time, it provides a holistic understanding of the influence of multiple factors on cartilage lesions after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Posterior Tibial Slope in Patients With Torn ACL Reconstruction Grafts Compared With Primary Tear or Native ACL: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background:

Increased posterior tibial slope (PTS) is a risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture and failure of ACL reconstruction (ACLR) grafts.

Purpose:

The purpose was to conduct a systematic review of literature on PTS measurements and to conduct a meta-analysis of comparable PTS measurements based on a patient’s ACL status. It was hypothesized that patients with torn ACLR grafts would have significantly larger medial and lateral PTS compared with patients with native ACLs or those who underwent primary ACLR.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A systematic review was performed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Included were studies that reported medial and/or lateral PTS measurements, those that reported PTS measurements based on ACL status (ie, intact ACL, primary ACL tear, failed ipsilateral ACLR, or revision ACLR), and those that reported their specific PTS measurement technique. Average PTS measurements, measurement location (medial or lateral tibial plateau) and technique, imaging modality used, and ACL status were extracted from each study. Data were pooled using DerSimonian and Laird random-effects models, and results were compared using the Altman interaction test.

Results:

The literature search identified 1705 studies, of which 82 (N = 12,971 patients) were included. There were 4028 patients in the intact ACL group (31%), 7405 in the primary ACLR group (57%), and 1538 in the failed ACLR group (12%). Measurements were obtained from lateral radiographs in 31 studies (38%), from magnetic resonance imaging in 47 studies (57%), and from computed tomography in 4 studies (5%). The failed ACLR group had a significantly larger lateral PTS (9.55°; 95% CI, 8.47°-10.63°) than either the primary ACL tear (7.13°; 95% CI, 6.58°-7.67°) or intact ACL (5.57°; 95% CI, 5.03°-6.11°) groups (P < .001 for both). The failed ACLR group also had a significantly larger medial PTS (9.05°; 95% CI, 7.80°-10.30°) than the primary (6.24°; 95% CI, 5.71°-6.78°) or intact ACL (6.28°; 95% CI, 5.21°-7.35°) groups (P < .001 for both).

Conclusion:

Both lateral and medial PTS measurements were greater in patients who had failed previous ACLR than those with a primary ACL tear or an intact native ACL. The lateral PTS of patients with primary ACL tears was greater than those with an intact native ACL.

[Clinical application of slope-reducing tibial osteotomy and anterior cruciate ligament revision in patients with abnormally increased posterior tibial slope]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of slope-reducing tibial osteotomy and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision in the treatment of patients with primary ACL reconstruction failure and abnormally increased posterior tibial slope (PTS).

METHODS

The clinical data of 9 patients with primary ACL reconstruction failure and abnormally increased PTS (≥17°) who met the selection criteria between January 2018 and January 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 8 males and 1 female; the age ranged from 21 to 42 years, with a median age of 30 years. Lachman test was positive in 9 patients. Pivot-shift test was negative in 6 cases, degree Ⅰ positive in 2 cases, and degree Ⅱ positive in 1 case. The PTS was (17.78±1.09)° and the anterior tibial translation (ATT) was (11.58±1.47) mm. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score was 51.0±3.8, Lysholm score was 49.7±4.6, and Tegner score was 3.7±0.7. The time from primary reconstruction to revision was 12-33 months, with an average of 19.6 months. Slope-reducing tibial osteotomy and ACL revision were performed. The improvement of knee function was evaluated by IKDC score, Lysholm score, and Tegner score; Lachman test and Pivot-shift test were used to evaluate the stability of knee joint. PTS and ATT were measured to observe the morphological changes of knee joint.

RESULTS

All the incisions healed by first intention, and there was no complication such as incision infection, fat liquefaction, necrosis, deep vein thrombosis of lower extremities, and neurovascular injury. All 9 patients were followed up 12-36 months, with an average of 25.8 months. At last follow-up, Lachman test and pivot-shift test were negative. IKDC score was 85.0±4.0, Lysholm score was 87.7±2.8, Tegner score was 6.8±0.7, PTS reduced to (9.89±0.60)°, and ATT shortened to (0.91±0.29) mm, which were significantly improved when compared with those before operation ( P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Slope-reducing tibial osteotomy and ACL revision in the treatment of patients with primary ACL reconstruction failure and abnormally increased PTS has a satisfactory short-term effectiveness. It can improve the stability of knee joint and maintain the normal shape of knee joint.

A high tibial slope, allograft use, and poor patient-reported outcome scores are associated with multiple ACL graft failures

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes, radiographic characteristics, and surgical factors between patients with single and multiple anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft failures. It was hypothesized that patients experiencing multiple ACL graft failures exhibit lower patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) and a higher (steeper) posterior tibial slope (PTS) than patients with single ACL graft failure.

METHODS

Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included in this retrospective cohort study. Based on the number of ACL graft failures, patients were assigned either to the group "single ACL graft failure "or" multiple ACL graft failures ". The PTS was measured on strict lateral radiographs. Validated PROs including the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Lysholm Score, Tegner Activity Scale, ACL-Return to Sport after Injury Scale, and Visual Analogue Scale for pain were collected.

RESULTS

Overall, 102 patients were included with 58 patients assigned to the single ACL graft failure group and 44 patients to the multiple ACL graft failures group. Quadriceps tendon autograft was used significantly more often (55% vs. 11%, p < 0.001) and allografts were used significantly less often (31% vs. 66%, p < 0.001) as the graft for first revision ACL reconstruction in patients with single versus multiple ACL graft failures. Patients with multiple ACL graft failures were associated with statistically significantly worse PROs (IKDC: 61.7 ± 19.3 vs. 77.4 ± 16.8, p < 0.05; Tegner Activity Scale: 4 (range, 0-7) vs. 6 (range 2-10), p < 0.05), higher PTS (12 ± 3° vs. 9 ± 3°, p < 0.001), and higher rates of subsequent surgery (73% vs. 14%, p < 0.001) and complications (45% vs. 17%, p < 0.05) than patients with single ACL graft failure.

CONCLUSION

Compared to single ACL graft failure in this study multiple ACL graft failures were associated with worse PROs, higher PTS, and allograft use. During the first revision ACL reconstruction, it is recommended to avoid the use of allografts and to consider slope-reducing osteotomies to avoid multiple ACL graft failures and improve PROs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 3.

Quadriceps tendon autograft is becoming increasingly popular in revision ACL reconstruction

PURPOSE

To evaluate trends in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R), with emphasis on intra-articular findings, grafts, and concurrent procedures. It was hypothesized that revision ACL-Rs over time show a trend toward increased complexity with increased use of autografts over allografts.

METHODS

This was a two-center retrospective study including patients undergoing revision ACL-R between 2010 and 2020. Demographic and surgical data including intra-articular findings and concurrent procedures were collected and compared for the time periods 2010-2014 and 2015-2020. All collected variables were compared between three pre-defined age groups (< 20 years, 20-30 years, > 30 years), right and left knees, and males and females. A time series analysis was performed to assess trends in revision ACL-R.

RESULTS

This study included 260 patients with a mean age of 26.2 ± 9.4 years at the time of the most recent revision ACL-R, representing the first, second, third, and fourth revision ACL-R for 214 (82%), 35 (14%), 10 (4%), and 1 (< 1%) patients, respectively. Patients age > 30 years showed a significantly longer mean time from primary ACL-R to most recent revision ACL-R (11.1 years), compared to patients age < 20 years (2.2 years, p < 0.001) and age 20-30 years (5.5 years, p < 0.05). Quadriceps tendon autograft was used significantly more often in 2015-2020 compared to 2010-2014 (49% vs. 18%, p < 0.001). A high rate of concurrently performed procedures including meniscal repairs (45%), lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET; 31%), osteotomies (13%), and meniscal allograft transplantations (11%) was shown. Concurrent LET was associated with intact cartilage and severely abnormal preoperative knee laxity and showed a statistically significant and linear increase over time (p < 0.05). Intact cartilage (41%, p < 0.05), concurrent medial meniscal repairs (39%, p < 0.05), and LET (35%, non-significant) were most frequently observed in patients aged < 20 years.

CONCLUSION

Quadriceps tendon autograft and concurrent LET are becoming increasingly popular in revision ACL-R. Intact cartilage and severely abnormal preoperative knee laxity represent indications for LET in revision ACL-R. The high rate of concurrent procedures observed demonstrates the high surgical demands of revision ACL-R.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Clinical Outcomes and the Failure Rate of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Were Comparable Between Patients Younger Than 40 Years and Patients Older Than 40 Years: A Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up Study

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes and failure rates of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) between young and middle-aged surgery patients.

METHODS

Patients who underwent revision ACLRs between January 2008 and June 2017 with a minimum 2-year follow-up were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to age: ≥40 years (group A) and <40 years (group B). Detailed patient demographic data, preoperative radiographic data, and concurrent meniscal and chondral lesion were reviewed. Clinical scores, laxity tests results, and graft failures were compared between groups at the final follow-up.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients (group A, n = 24, 46.6 ± 4.5 years; group B, n = 62, 26.2 ± 6.3 years) were included in this study. Demographic data showed that the time interval from primary to revision ACLR was longer in group A than in group B (96.2 ± 80.9 vs. 52.0 ± 42.1 months, P = .011). Group A had a higher prevalence of chondral defects of the trochlea (P = .016). No significant differences were identified in the prevalence and severity of meniscal lesions. At the final follow-up, all clinical scores were improved postoperatively but did not differ significantly between the groups. No significant differences were identified in side-to-side difference on Telos stress radiographs (group A, 6.3 ± 5.0 mm; group B, 5.6 ± 3.8 mm; P = .403) and graft failure rate (group A, 33.3%; group B, 30.6%; P = .358) at the final follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study showed that the clinical outcomes of revision ACLRs in patients improved significantly in patients younger than 40 years and were comparable to those observed in patients older than 40 years at a minimum 2-year follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Healthy knee KT1000 measurements of anterior tibial translation have significant variation

PURPOSE

The most commonly used arthrometer for measuring and reporting anterior tibial translation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is the KT1000. Reports on its consistency and reproducibility vary in the literature, but it remains the "gold standard". The purpose of this study was to assess agreement of KT1000 measurements in a daily clinical setting.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of anterior knee translation in the healthy knee of 770 patients over a 17-year time period was performed. In this cohort, a total of 24 investigators performed 1890 measurement sets at 89 Newtons (N), 134N and at maximum manual force (MMax) level. To assess the inter- and intra-observer agreement, the intraclass-correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. The "investigator effect" was a difference between two examiners in the same patient and the "device effect'' a difference within one examiner in the same patient. Minimally important difference (MID) was calculated as 0.5 of the standard deviation.

RESULTS

Thirteen investigators were female, performing 1099 measurements and 11 were male, performing 791 measurements. ICC ranged between 0.558 and 0.644. At the MMax level, male investigators had a higher mm reading than female investigators (p < 0.001). Increased experience did not correlate with a higher ICC. MID ranged between 0.85 and 1.65 mm.

CONCLUSION

This study investigated the KT1000 arthrometer in a clinical setting with a large number of investigators. This device delivers moderate agreement of results. Both the device and investigator effect are present. The MMax level has shown the lowest agreement and a dependency on the investigator gender.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III diagnostic study.

Revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a pedicled quadruple hamstring autograft

INTRODUCTION

Results of iterative ACL reconstructions are lower than after primary reconstructions. Our aim was to report the results of a retrospective series of revision using pedicled quadruple hamstring autograft. The hypothesis was that the results were satisfactory and comparable to the literature.

METHODS

The study period was from January 2012 to December 2014. Fourteen patients (average age 26) were included. A fascia lata graft was used 12 times for primary reconstruction. Trauma was the cause of failure 12 times. The time interval between primary reconstruction and revision was 6.2 years. Preoperative scores used were LYSHOLM, TEGNER and IKDC. Sagittal stability was measured using the KT-1000 device. X-rays and MRI were performed to confirm the diagnosis, look for preoperative osteoarthritis and evaluate the position of the bony tunnels (Bernard and Hertel). Bone tunnels were in a proper position 14 times.

RESULTS

At 45-month follow-up, improvement of objective IKDC score was significant (85.7% A/B, p < 0.0002) as well as subjective IKDC score (85.5, p < 0.0004). A significant improvement was established for the LYSHOLM score (91.8, p = 0.001) using the Wilcoxon test. The average LYSHOLM score was 92% (p > 0.5), and the average TEGNER score was 5.5 (p = 0.003). The Lachman test found a hard stop in all patients. The pivot shift test was negative for 78.5% of the cases. The laxity measurement found 12 cases with less than 3 mm. One persistent distal hypoesthesia at 2-year follow-up was observed.

CONCLUSION

The hypothesis was confirmed. This series differs by the cause of failure, which was essentially traumatic, and the initial predominance of a fascia lata graft. These results remain to be confirmed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective case series, level IV.