Revision PCL Reconstruction Review/Update

Patient Reported Clinical Outcomes Following PCL Suture Augmentation in Patients with Multiligamentous Knee Injury: A Retrospective Observational Study

Purpose

To compare the patient-reported outcomes between patients with posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction or repair alone versus PCL reconstruction or repair with internal bracing (IB) in the context of multi-ligament knee injuries (MLKI).

Methods

All patients who underwent surgical management of MLKI at two institutions between 2006 and 2020 were retrospectively identified and offered participation in the study. Patient reported outcomes were measured via three instruments: Lysholm Knee score, Multiligament Quality of Life (ML-QOL), and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computer adaptive testing (CAT). The postoperative outcomes and reoperation rates were compared between the internal bracing and non-internal bracing groups.

Results

Fifty-two patients were analyzed; 34 were included in the IB group (17.6% female; age 33.1 ±1.60 years), and 18 were included in the non-IB group (11.1% female; age 34.1 ±3.72 years). Mean follow-up time of the entire cohort was 1.44 ± 0.22 years (IB: 1.21 ± 0.18; non-IB: 2.1 ±0.65). There were no significant differences between PROMIS CAT [PROMIS Pain (54.4 ±1.78 vs 51.7 ±1.70, p=0.319), Physical Function (44.3 ±2.27 vs 47.9 ±1.52, p=0.294), Mobility (44.0 ±1.71 vs 46.1 ±2.10, p=0.463)], ML-QOL [ML-QOL Physical Impairment (40.7 ±4.21 vs 41.7±5.10, p=0.884), Emotional Impairment (49.2 ±4.88 vs 44.7±5.87, p=0.579), Activity Limitation (43.5 ±4.56 vs 31.5±3.62, p=0.087), Societal Involvement (44.9 ±4.96 vs 37.5 ±5.30, p=0.345)] and Lysholm knee score (61.8 ±4.55 vs 61.0 ±4.95, p=0.916) postoperatively compared to the non-IB group.

Conclusion

In this group of patients, function and patient-reported outcomes between patients treated with PCL reconstruction and repair without internal brace versus those with additional internal brace augmentation were not significantly different. Further research encompassing a larger patient sample is necessary to investigate the efficacy of the internal brace for PCL injury in the context of MLKI injuries.

Decreased posterior tibial slope is a risk factor for primary posterior cruciate ligament rupture and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failure: A systematic review

PURPOSE

To determine bony knee morphological factors associated with primary posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) rupture or PCL graft failure after PCL reconstruction.

METHODS

Three databases, namely MEDLINE, PubMed and EMBASE, were searched on 30th May 2023. The authors adhered to the PRISMA and R-AMSTAR guidelines as well as the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data such as receiver operating characteristic curve parameters, as well as p-values for comparisons of values between patients with PCL pathology and control patients, were recorded.

RESULTS

Nine studies comprising 1054 patients were included. Four studies reported that patients with PCL injury had flatter medial posterior tibial slopes (MTS) than controls, with mean values of 4.3 (range: 3.0-7.0) and 6.5 (range: 5.0-9.2) degrees, respectively. Two studies reported an MTS cutoff value ranging below 3.90-3.93° being a significant risk factor for primary PCL rupture or PCL graft failure. Two studies reported that shallow medial tibial depths were associated with primary PCL rupture, with mean values of 2.1 (range: 2.0-2.2) and 2.6 (range: 2.4-2.7) mm in PCL injury and control groups, respectively. Stenotic intercondylar notches and femoral condylar width were not consistently associated with PCL injuries.

CONCLUSION

Decreased MTS is associated with primary PCL rupture and graft failure after PCL reconstruction with values below 3.93° being considered as a significant risk factor. Less common risk factors include shallow medial tibial depth, while femoral condylar width and parameters with regards to the intercondylar notch, such as notch width, notch width index and intercondylar notch volume, demonstrated conflicting associations with primary or secondary PCL injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Midterm Outcomes After Revision Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With a Single-Bundle Transtibial Autograft

Background:

There is a lack of consensus regarding the optimal technique for revision posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction.

Purpose:

To evaluate midterm outcomes after revision PCL reconstruction using a single-bundle transtibial autograft.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

We reviewed 17 patients who underwent revision PCL reconstruction performed in our medical center by a single surgeon from 2003 to 2016. The cohort included 12 male and 5 female patients with a mean age of 31.3 years (range, 17-48 years). All of the patients underwent single-bundle transtibial reconstruction using the same surgical technique and were reviewed at a minimum of 4 years postoperatively. Preoperative and postoperative posterior stress radiography was performed. The preoperative tibial slope and tibiofemoral angle were also measured. Preoperative and postoperative functional outcomes were evaluated using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective and objective scores as well as the Lysholm score.

Results:

The most common factor that contributed to the failure of primary surgery was misplaced tunnels, especially on the femoral side. There were 2 patients who had grade 2 laxity preoperatively, and 15 patients had grade 3 laxity preoperatively. At the latest follow-up, all 17 patients had grade 1 laxity. On posterior stress radiography, posterior displacement improved from 10.8 ± 2.1 mm preoperatively to 2.9 ± 1.1 mm at the latest follow-up (P < .001). The IKDC subjective score improved from 34.9 ± 6.8 preoperatively to 75.3 ± 15.7 postoperatively (P < .001), and the Lysholm score improved from 38.1 ± 10.0 preoperatively to 88.5 ± 7.6 postoperatively (P < .001). All patients reached the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the Lysholm score, and 94% reached the MCID for the IKDC subjective score, with 65% reaching the Patient Acceptable Symptom State.

Conclusion:

According to the findings of this study, arthroscopic revision PCL reconstruction with a single-bundle transtibial autograft offered satisfactory outcomes at midterm follow-up.

Posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with independent internal brace reinforcement: surgical technique and clinical outcomes with a minimum two year follow-up

PURPOSE

We developed an augmentation technique for PCL reconstruction with independent internal brace reinforcement and evaluated the functional outcome after PCL reconstruction employing autologous hamstrings augmented with an internal brace system for patients with isolated or combined grade 3 posterior instability who were treated with this technique.

METHODS

From January 2016 to January 2018, patients with isolated or combined grade 3 PCL tears who underwent single-bundle PCL reconstruction using autologous hamstrings augmented with independent internal braces were studied. The function of the operated knee was evaluated according to the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm score, and Tegner activity score. The patients were asked the level of returned to their previous sport. Posterior knee laxity was examined with a KT-1000 arthrometer, and data on range of motion (ROM), re-operation, and other complications were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 33 consecutive patients who received single-bundle PCL reconstruction using autologous hamstrings augmented with independent internal braces with a minimum two years follow-up were included in this study. Two patients had undergone this procedure during the study period and were not included in this study (one had combined bone fractures, and one patient had previous meniscus surgery). Thirty-one patients were available for final analysis. The mean follow-up was 45.35 ± 10.88 months (range 29-66 months). The average IKDC subjective knee evaluation scores from 51.65 ± 12.35 to 84.52 ± 6.42, the Lysholm score from 53.90 ± 11.86 to 85.68 ± 4.99, and the Tegner score from 2.81 ± 0.79 to 6.71 ± 1.83 (P < 0.05 for all). The mean total posterior side-to-side difference in knee laxity, assessed using a KT-1000 arthrometer, decreased from 12.13 ± 2.66 mm pre-operatively to 1.87 ± 0.56 mm post-operatively at 70° (P < 0.05). Most patients (29/31) had normal or near normal knee ROM post-operatively; two patients revealed a 6-15° loss of knee flexion compared with the contralateral knee. Twenty-nine patients (93.55%) returned to a normal daily exercise level. Twenty-three patients (74.19%) returned to competitive sports with high-level sports (Tegner score of 6 or above; eleven patients (35.48%) reported to be on the same level as well as the Tegner level); six patients (19.35%) returned to recreational sports (Tegner score of 4 or 5). Two patients had Tegner scores of 2 and 3, indicating poor function level. No patient needed PCL revision surgery during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Single-bundle PCL reconstruction with internal brace augmentation for PCL injury exhibited satisfactory posterior stability and clinical outcomes in patients with isolated or combined grade 3 PCL injuries at a minimum two year follow-up.

Clinical outcomes of rectangular tunnel technique in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction were comparable to the results of conventional round tunnel technique

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes between the conventional round and rectangular tunnel techniques in single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction.

METHODS

Twenty-seven and 108 patients who underwent PCL reconstructions using a rectangular dilator (Group 1) and rounded tunnel reamer (Group 2), respectively, were included. The exclusion criteria were having a concomitant fracture, osteotomy, subtotal or total meniscectomy, and no remnant PCL tissue. A 4:1 propensity score matching was performed. The knee laxity on stress radiography, International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation score, Tegner activity score and Orthopädische Arbeitsgruppe Knie score were evaluated.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of clinical scores. (n.s.) The mean posterior translations were also not significantly different between the Group 1 and 2 (3.6 ± 2.8 and 3.8. ± 3.1 mm, respectively; n.s.). However, 3 patients (11.1%) in Group 1 and 15 patients (13.8%) in Group 2 showed posterior translation of > 5 mm. The combined posterolateral corner sling technique was performed for 27 patients (100%) in Group 1 and for 96 patients (88.9%) in Group 2. We found no significant difference in rotational stability at the final follow-up. One patient was found to have a femoral condyle fracture during rectangular femoral tunnel establishment, which was healed after screw fixation, without laxity, during follow-up. The intra- and inter-observer reliabilities of the radiological measurements ranged from 0.81 to 0.89.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic anatomical remnant-preserving PCL reconstruction using a rectangular dilator showed satisfactory clinical results and stability as compared with PCL reconstruction using a conventional rounded reamer. Rectangular tunnel technique in PCL reconstruction could be a good treatment option with theoretical advantage to be anatomic.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Revision of failed-posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction due to tibial tunnel misplacement: A case report

Introduction

Posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction failure is a rare condition found. The failure caused by some factors, including improper graft tunnel placement. Although the proper tibial tunnel placement in PCL reconstruction is still controversial, make the tunnel placement anatomically essential to decrease the risk of failure. The use of PCL jig only to guide the direction of tibial tunnel does not always give good results.

Presentation of case

We report a case of 29 year old male with total rupture of ACL and PCL that underwent reconstruction for both ligaments. We found the failure of the PCL graft 2 years after the surgery was related to the tibial tunnel placement which was placed not in proper anatomical site. We performed revision PCL surgery with transseptal portal technique to ensure the tibial tunnel is placed in appropriate position.

Discussion

The cause of failure was associated with misposition of tibial tunnel. The tibial tunnel performed in previous surgery was too anterior than the anatomical foot print. This condition might be caused by surgical technique which depending only on PCL jig to guide the tibial tunnel direction and location. We performed transseptal portal technique get better visualization on the posterior aspect of the knee to achieve the proper direction of tibial tunnel.

Conclusion

The use of PCL jig as the only tools for guiding tibial tunneling should be avoided. Additional tool such as transseptal portal is required to ensure the proper anatomical tibia tunnel in order to achive good PCL graft placement.