Large variation in indications, preferred surgical technique and rehabilitation protocol for primary anterior cruciate ligament repair: a survey among ESSKA members

Preferences in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A survey among orthopedic surgeons in China

The purpose of this study was to reveal the current trends and preferences of Chinese orthopedic surgeons regarding anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction through a nationwide web-based survey conducted in China. The survey questionnaire was distributed via WeChat to the chairmen of provincial orthopedic and sports medicine organizing committees in China, who then shared it in their respective WeChat workgroups. The questionnaire consisted of 52 multiple-choice questions covering 8 sections. Data collection was implemented by Questionnaire Star. A total of 812 valid questionnaires were returned: 94.21% of the respondents preferred single-bundle reconstruction of ACL, while 61.70% preferred autogenous semitendinosus plus gracilis reconstruction; 76.35% of the respondents preferred establishing the femoral tunnel first, while 47.29% preferred establishing the femoral tunnel through a medial auxiliary approach; and 85.10% of the respondents recommended patients to undergo surgery within 3 months after ligament injury. Besides, the vast majority of respondents chose to retain the ligamentous remnant bundle (92.98%) and recommended routine use of knee braces postoperatively (94.09%). It is recommended to perform arthroscopic single-bundle ACL reconstruction with the remnant preserving technique using a hamstring autograft within 3 months of ACL rupture, with support of postoperative functional braces.

Anatomic Arthroscopic Primary Repair of Proximal Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears

Within the last decade, various highly diverse anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) preservation techniques have been proposed, as contemporary selective arthroscopic ACL preservation experienced a resurgence. Among surgical techniques, there are a variety of suturing, fixation, and augmentation methods, whereas a common thread, considering essential anatomic and biomechanical properties, is missing. This technique aims to anatomically reapproximate both the anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) bundles to their respective femoral footprints. Additionally, a PL compression stitch is performed to increase the ligament-bone contact area and recreate the anatomic vectors of the native bundles, therefore, creating a more anatomic and biomechanical construct. This technique is a minimally invasive procedure, with no graft harvesting nor tunnel drilling, which leads to decreased pain levels, earlier return of full range motion (ROM), and faster rehabilitation, while failure rates seem to be comparable to that of ACL reconstruction. We present an updated surgical technique of anatomic arthroscopic primary repair with suture anchor fixation for patients with proximal ACL tears.

Trends in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair: A Bibliometric and Visualized Analysis

Background:

Bibliometrics is a methodology that measures the scientific output of an author, institution, or country. Visualized analysis is the transformation of data into visible form by software, highlighting important features, including commonalities and anomalies, allowing users to easily and quickly perceive significant aspects of their data.

Purpose:

To conduct a bibliometric analysis of the literature on anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair, with visualization of trends, in order to identify the areas of interest and the primary researchers involved in ACL repair.

Study Design:

Cross-sectional study.

Methods:

The PubMed database was queried on April 14, 2022, for publications that reported on ACL repair from 1960 onward. The initial search resulted in 1392 publications. Filter settings were applied to remove publications with weak correlation, such as those on meniscal repair and ACL reconstruction. Publication information, citations, authors, commonly used terms, and affiliated institutions and countries were analyzed by VOSviewer and Python.

Results:

A total of 553 articles were included for analysis. Three techniques were visualized: bridge-enhanced ACL repair, internal brace, and dynamic intraligamentary stabilization. The most published authors were Martha Murray (51 articles), Gregory Difelice (35 articles), and Braden Fleming (31 articles). The most cited article was “Collagen–Platelet Rich Plasma Hydrogel Enhances Primary Repair of the Porcine Anterior Cruciate Ligament” by Murray et al. The journals with the most publications on ACL repair were the American Journal of Sports Medicine (n = 49); Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy (n = 49); and Arthroscopy (n = 48). The top 3 institutions by publication number were the Hospital for Special Surgery (n = 51), Boston Children’s Hospital (n = 49), and Brown University (n = 31), with the most publications coming from the United States (n = 242), Germany (n = 83), and the United Kingdom (n = 47).

Conclusion:

The results demonstrate that the research on ACL repair comes from a small number of authors and corresponding institutions; the top sports medicine journals and the developed countries have an interest in this topic.

Primary Repair versus Reconstruction in Patients with Bilateral Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries: What Do Patients Prefer?

Purpose. The purpose is to evaluate knee preference and functional outcomes of patients with primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair in one knee and ACL reconstruction in the contralateral side. Methods. All patients who underwent both procedures were retrospectively reviewed at minimum two-year follow-up. Patients were asked to complete questionnaires regarding their operated knees’ preferences during rehabilitation, daily activities, sports activities, and overall function. Furthermore, the Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee, Forgotten Joint Score-12, and Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury were completed. Results. Twenty-one patients were included. All patients underwent ACL reconstruction first, which was displayed at younger age at surgery (24 vs. 33 years, $p=0.010$ ) and longer follow-up (10.2 vs. 2.3 years, $p<0.001$ ), respectively. Thirty-three percent preferred the repaired knee, 11% the reconstructed knee, and 56% had no preference; however, 78% indicated that their repaired knee was less painful during rehabilitation and 83% reported earlier range of motion (ROM) return following repair, which was similar for both knees in 17%. Eighty-three percent of patients indicated better function and progression during rehabilitation with their repaired knee and 11% with their reconstructed knees. No statistical differences were found in patient-reported outcomes between both procedures (all $p>0.4$ ). Objective laxity assessment showed mean side-to-side difference of 0.6 mm between both sides in favor of the reconstructed knee. Conclusion. This study showed that ACL repair and ACL reconstruction lead to similar functional outcomes. However, patients undergoing both procedures may have less pain, earlier ROM return, and faster rehabilitation progression following primary repair.

Rehabilitation Principles to Consider for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair

CONTEXT

Injury to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is among the most common orthopaedic injuries, and reconstruction of a ruptured ACL is a common orthopaedic procedure. In general, surgical intervention is necessary to restore stability to the injured knee, and to prevent meniscal damage. Along with surgery, intense postoperative physical therapy is needed to restore function to the injured extremity. ACL reconstruction (ACLR) has been the standard of care in recent decades, and advances in surgical technology have reintroduced the prospect of augmented primary repair of the native ACL via a variety of methods.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A search of PubMed database of articles and reviews available in English was performed through 2020. The search terms ACLR, anterior cruciate ligament repair, bridge enhanced acl repair, suture anchor repair, dynamic intraligamentary stabilization, internal bracing, suture ligament augmentation, and internal brace ligament augmentation were used.

STUDY DESIGN

Clinical review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 5.

RESULTS

No exact consensus exists on effective rehabilitation protocols after ACL repair techniques, as the variation in published protocols seem even greater than the variation in those for ACLR. For some techniques such as internal bracing and dynamic interligamentary stabilization, it is likely permissible for the patients to progress to full weightbearing and discontinue bracing sooner. However, caution should be applied with regard to earlier return to sport than after ACLR as to minimize risk for retear.

CONCLUSION

More research is needed to address how physical therapies must adapt to these innovative repair techniques. Until that is accomplished, we recommend that physical therapists understand the differences among the various ACL surgery techniques discussed here and work with the surgeons to develop a rehabilitation protocol for their mutual patients.

STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATION TAXONOMY (SORT)

C.

Suture tape augmentation improves laxity of MCL repair in the ACL reconstructed knee

PURPOSE

Medial collateral ligament (MCL) injury is very common and surgical repair is sometimes necessary. Especially in the setting of simultaneous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) as the ACL is the secondary restraint against valgus stress. The goal of this study was to evaluate knee biomechanics after suture repair of the MCL augmented with suture tape, as compared to MCL repair alone, in the setting of concomitant ACL reconstruction (ACLR).

METHODS

Fifteen fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees were tested using a six-degrees-of-freedom robotic system under four loadings: (a) an 89.0 N anterior tibial load, (b) a 5.0 Nm internal and external rotation torque, (c) a 10.0 Nm valgus load, (d) a 7.0 Nm valgus load combined with 5.0 Nm internal rotation torque as a static simulated pivot-shift. The tested conditions were ACLR with the following states: (1) MCL intact, (2) MCL deficient, (3) MCL Repair, and (4) MCL repair augmented with suture tape (MCL Repair + ST). Under the different knee loadings, the tibial displacement, and the force in either the intact MCL, suture repaired MCL or repaired MCL-suture tape complex was measured.

RESULTS

While neither the MCL Repair nor the MCL Repair + ST restored valgus rotation to the MCL intact state, displacement was significantly smaller after MCL Repair + ST (p < 0.05). The knee rotation under external rotation torque in MCL Repair + ST did not differ MCL intact (n.s.), while with MCL Repair the rotation was significantly greater (p < 0.05). MCL Repair + ST did not cause an over-constraint of the knee in any of the tested loading conditions.

CONCLUSION

In a combined ACL-reconstruction-MCL-repair model, MCL Repair augmented with suture tape improved valgus and external rotation laxity when compared to MCL suture repair alone. Suture tape augmentation may provide this additional means of stabilization and can be added at the time of surgical repair of the MCL. Clinically this may result in lower failure rates and less residual laxity after MCL repair, as well as shorter immobilization times and faster return to play.

Role of Age on Success of Arthroscopic Primary Repair of Proximal Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears

PURPOSE

To assess failure rates and patient-reported outcomes measures following arthroscopic primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair of proximal tears in different age groups.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2017, the first 113 consecutive patients treated with repair were retrospectively reviewed at minimum of 2 years. Patients were stratified into 3 age groups: ≤21, 22-35, and >35 years. Primary outcomes were ipsilateral reinjury or reoperation, and contralateral injury rates, and secondary outcomes consisted of Lysholm, modified Cincinnati, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective, pain, and satisfaction scores. Group differences were compared using χ² tests and Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

Follow-up was obtained in 113 patients (100%). Median age was 35 years (interquartile range [IQR] 23-43) and median follow-up was 2.2 years (IQR 2.0-2.8). Overall, ACL reinjury occurred in 13 patients (11.5%), reoperation in 7 patients (6.2%), complications in 2 patients (1.8%) and contralateral ACL injury in 4 patients (3.5%). Overall, median Lysholm was 95 (IQR 89-100) and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective 92 (IQR 84-99). Treatment failure was significantly greater in the youngest age group (37.0%) as compared with the middle and older groups (4.2% and 3.2%, both P < .005). No significant differences were seen in reoperation, complication, or contralateral injury rates between groups (all P > .2), nor in patient-reported outcomes measures between the groups (all P > .1).

CONCLUSIONS

The failure rate of primary repair of proximal ACL tears is high in patients aged 21 or younger (37.0%), and this should be taken into account when discussing repair in this patient group. In patients older than 21, repair may be an excellent treatment with low failure (3.5%) and complication rates (1.2%) and good subjective scores.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.