Similar outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in paediatric and adult populations: a 1-year follow-up of 506 paediatric operations in Denmark

Good physical function but reduced quality of life in children 3 years after ACL reconstruction

PURPOSE

To assess children's physical function and subjective knee status 1 and 3 years after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. It was hypothesised that there was no difference between the operated and normal legs in relation to physical strength and function, that there was <-2 mm side-to-side difference in knee laxity, and that the subjective knee function was better 3 years after ACL reconstruction compared to 1 year after.

METHODS

Children (<16 years of age) who had an ACL reconstruction had follow-up with physical function tests (four hop tests and strength measurement in a power rig [PR]), anterior knee laxity (measured using a Rolimeter) and patient-reported outcome measures (Pedi-International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS]-Child) 1 and 3 years postoperatively. Changes from 1- to 3-year follow-up were evaluated with a paired t test.

RESULTS

Out of 148 ACL reconstructed children, 60 had all measures. The four hop tests and the PR all yielded a Limb Symmetry Index >90% at both follow-ups. There was a significant improvement from 1- to 3-year follow-up in two-hop tests (6 m on time and crossover hop). Side-to-side knee laxity was >2 mm in four children at 1- and 3-year tests. Pedi-IKDC scores increased, and KOOS-Child improved significantly from 1 to 3 years in two of the five domains: 'Sport' and 'Quality of life', but scores were lower than in a cohort of normal children.

CONCLUSION

The children had good objective physical function 1 and 3 years after ACL reconstruction. However, scores from the KOOS-Child sport-specific function and quality of life domains were lower than in normal children.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Approximately half of pediatric or adolescent patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction return to the same level of sport or higher: A systematic review

PURPOSE

To summarise the surgical techniques and clinical outcomes in paediatric and adolescent patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (r-ACLR).

METHODS

Three databases (MEDLINE, PubMed and EMBASE) were searched from inception to 29 July 2023. The authors adhered to the PRISMA and R-AMSTAR guidelines as well as the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data on demographics, surgical details, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), rates of instability, rupture and return to sport (RTS) were extracted.

RESULTS

Eight studies comprising 706 (711 knees) patients were included (48.7% female). The mean age at r-ACLR was 17.1 years (range: 16.5-18.0). Autografts (67.5%) were more common than allografts (32.2%) in revision, with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) being the most prevalent autograft source (59.6%). Bone grafts were used in seven patients (4.8% of 146 patients). The most common femoral and tibial fixation techniques were interference screws (37.6% and 38.1%, of 244 patients, respectively). The most common tunnelling strategy was anatomic (69.1% of 236 patients), and meniscus repairs were performed in 39.7% of 256 patients. The re-rupture rate was 13.0% in 293 patients. RTS at the same level or higher was 51.6% in 219 patients. The mean (SD) Lysholm score was 88.1 (12.9) in 78 patients, the mean (SD) Tegner score was 6.0 (1.6) in 78 patients, and the mean (SD) IKDC score was 82.6 (16.0) in 126 patients.

CONCLUSION

R-ACLR in paediatric and adolescent patients predominantly uses BPTB autografts and interference screw femoral and tibial fixation with concomitant meniscal procedures. Rates of re-rupture and RTS at the same level or higher were 13.0% and 51.6%, respectively. Information from this review can provide orthopaedic surgeons with a comprehensive understanding of the most commonly used operative techniques and their outcomes for revision ACLR in this population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.