Health-related quality of life and direct costs in patients with anterior cruciate ligament injury: single-bundle versus double-bundle reconstruction in a low-demand cohort--a randomized trial with 2 years of follow-up

Anatomic Double-Bundle and Single-Bundle Reconstructions Yield Similar Outcomes Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate outcomes of arthroscopic single-bundle (SB) versus anatomic double-bundle (ADB) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in adults through a synthesis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We hypothesized that SB and ADB methods would lead to similar outcomes after reconstruction of ACL rupture.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses checklist guided our reporting. To identify RCTs that compared SB and ADB reconstructions, a thorough literature search was conducted of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Web of Science. The methodologic quality of each included study was independently assessed by 2 authors using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. The Anatomic ACL Reconstruction Scoring Checklist (AARSC) was used to screen the eligibility of each study's operative approaches. Twelve clinical outcomes were investigated through pooled analyses conducted using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis synthesized 13 RCTs comparing postoperative outcomes between ADB and SB reconstructions of ACLs. After a minimum follow-up of 12 months, ADB and SB technique resulted in similar subjective clinical outcomes, including the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, Lysholm score, Tegner activity score, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score sports subscale. Similarly, no statistically significant outcomes were found for objective outcomes such as International Knee Documentation Committee objective grade, pivot-shift test, Lachman test, side-to-side difference, extension deficit, flexion deficit, and osteoarthritis change. However, patients who underwent SB reconstruction had significantly greater complication rates than those that underwent ADB reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

When an ACLR approach meets a minimal total AARSC score of 8, ADB and SB techniques may result in similar subjective and objective outcomes, but the ADB technique may lead to lower complication rates following surgery. We recommend that surgeons favor ADB ACLR, as guided by the AARSC.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, systematic review and meta-analysis of Level I randomized controlled trials.

The Relationship of Knee-related Quality of Life With Function, Psychological Factors, Strength, Performance, and Postural Stability After ACL Reconstruction: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Patients after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) have decreased health-related quality of life (QoL) compared with healthy control participants. Few studies have verified the predictors of QoL using Quality of Life Outcome Measure Questionnaire for Chronic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Deficiency (ACL-QoL), and no study has verified the relationship of psychological factors and knee function with ACL-QoL in patients after ACLR.

HYPOTHESIS

Knee functional status, muscle strength, performance in hop tests, postural stability, and psychological factors would be the predictors of QoL after ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4.

METHODS

A total of 131 participants who had undergone ACLR at least 6 months previously were evaluated. QoL was assessed using ACL-QoL; knee functional status, using International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee (IKDC) and global rating scale (GRS); psychological readiness, using Anterior Cruciate Ligament Return to Sport after Injury Scale (ACL-RSI); kinesiophobia, using Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK-17); knee strength, using isokinetic dynamometer; performance, using single-leg hop tests; and postural stability, using Biodex Balance System. Pearson's linear correlation and stepwise hierarchical multiple linear regression analyses were performed to verify the predictors of QoL.

RESULTS

ACL-QoL showed a moderate correlation with IKDC (r = 0.69), GRS (r = 0.55), ACL-RSI (r = 0.50), and TSK-17 (r = -0.49). ACL-QoL presented none to low correlations with the variables of muscle strength, postural stability, and performance in hop tests. The variables related to the knee functional status and psychological factors (IKDC, GRS, ACL-RSI, and TSK-17) were found to be the predictors of QoL (R2 = 0.56; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Knee functional status, psychological readiness, and kinesiophobia were the predictors of knee-related QoL in patients after ACLR.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

These results can assist clinicians in the therapeutic monitoring of the factors that may interfere with QoL in patients after ACLR.

Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Not Superior to Anatomic Single-Bundle Reconstruction at 10-Year Follow-up: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The anatomic double-bundle (DB) technique is purported to be a superior technique due to its mimicking of the double-stranded anatomic formation of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Previous studies with 2-, 5- and 10-year follow-up are conflicted as to whether this technique is superior to the previous gold standard method of ACL reconstruction, the anatomic single-bundle (SB) reconstruction.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare the outcomes of the anatomic DB technique and anatomic SB technique with independent drilling at 10 years after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. We hypothesized that DB ACL reconstruction would result in a better outcome in terms of the pivot-shift test.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A total of 105 patients (33 women, 72 men; median age, 27 years [range, 18-52 years]) were randomized and underwent ACL reconstruction (DB group: n = 53; SB group: n = 52). All reconstruction procedures were performed anatomically by identifying the ACL footprint, using the anteromedial portal for femoral tunnel drilling, and utilizing interference screws for tibial and femoral fixation. One blinded observer examined the patients both preoperatively and at follow-up (median, 120 months [range, 112-134 months]). Multiple subjective and objective clinical evaluations were used to assess the outcomes. Radiographic assessments of osteoarthritis were performed using the Ahlbäck, Kellgren-Lawrence, and Fairbank classification systems early postoperatively and at the final follow-up.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, no differences were found between the study groups. Overall, 70 patients (67%; DB group: n = 39; SB group: n = 31) were available for analysis at 10-year follow-up. No significant difference could be shown between the groups in terms of the pivot-shift grade, knee laxity measurements using the KT-1000 arthrometer, manual Lachman grade, single-leg hop test result, range of motion measurements, Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity score, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) score. Correspondingly, no differences were found between the groups regarding the presence of radiographic osteoarthritis at follow-up. Both groups improved at follow-up compared with preoperatively in terms of the pivot-shift grade, knee laxity measurements using the KT-1000 arthrometer, manual Lachman grade, Lysholm knee score, and KOOS score (P < .05 [highest P value for any comparison]).

CONCLUSION

The anatomic DB technique was not superior to the anatomic SB technique with independent drilling at 10-year follow-up in regard to objective and subjective measurements. As such, one could argue that there is no need for the continued use of the anatomic DB technique in an unselected population.

Single Bundle Versus Double Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear is considered as one of the most common sport-related musculoskeletal injuries. Double bundle (DB) and single bundle (SB) surgical techniques has been widely adopted for ACL reconstruction. This systematic review aimed to provide updated evidence by comparing the short-term, mid-term, and long-term knee stability and functional outcomes of DB and SB reconstruction techniques.

Methods

We searched Medline, Web of Science, and CENTRAL. We have selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared DB and SB ACL reconstruction techniques for primary isolated ACL tear. We have assessed the following outcomes: pivot shift test, Lachman test, KT-1000/2000 knee ligament arthrometer, Lysholm knee function score, Tegner activity score, and graft failure. We have used the standardized mean difference (SMD) was to summarize the continuous outcomes while risk ratio (RR) was used to summarize the dichotomous outcomes.

Results

A total of 34 RCTs that enrolled 2,992 participants deemed eligible. Overall, DB showed significantly better outcomes in terms of pivot shift test (RR = 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.75), Lachman test (RR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95), and KT 1000/2000 arthrometer (SMD = - 0.21, 95% CI - 0.34 to - 0.08). No discernible difference was found between DB and SB techniques in the overall Lysholm score (SMD = 0.12, 95% CI - 0.03 to 0.27), Tegner score (SMD = 0.03, 95% CI - 0.17 to 0.24), or graft failure rate (RR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.85).

Conclusions

Our review suggests that DB ACL reconstruction technique shows significantly better knee stability and functional outcomes than SB at short-term follow-up. However, both techniques exhibit similar outcomes at mid-term and long-term follow-up.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-022-00718-0.

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.

The Health-Related Quality of Life of Patients Waiting for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Worse Than an Age- and Sex-Matched Population: Increasing Time on Waiting List for Surgery Was Independently Associated with a Worse Quality of Life

Background

The aims of this study were to assess the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients awaiting anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction compared to the population at risk: whether knee-specific function was predictive of HRQoL and to identify factors associated with a worse HRQoL.

Methods

Sixty-seven patients (male, n = 50; female, n = 17; mean age, 29) identified from the surgical waiting list completed a questionnaire that included demographics, BMI, time of injury, EuroQol 5-dimension (EQ-5D), Short-Form (SF-36), and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores. Age- and sex-matched HRQoL data were obtained from population level data.

Results

The mean EQ-5D score for the study cohort was significantly worse than the matched score (difference, 0.367; p < 0.001), and the same trend was observed for all eight dimensions of the SF-36 score. Thirty-three (49%) patients felt their health, in general, was somewhat or much worse compared to one year ago. There was a correlation between IKDC and EQ-5D scores (r = 0.540, p < 0.001). Linear regression was used to formulate the EQ-5D score: EQ-5D = (IKDCx0.013)-0.015 (constant). The SF-36 physical component and length of time on the waiting list were independently associated with the HRQoL, with each 14-point drop or for every 200 days, a clinically significant deterioration in patients' HRQoL occurred, respectively.

Conclusions

Patients had a significantly worse HRQoL when compared to the age- and sex-matched population, which deteriorates with worsening physical function and increasing length of time on the waiting list. The knee-specific IKDC correlated with HRQoL and could be used to estimate the EQ-5D score.

Double bundle ACL reconstruction leads to better restoration of knee laxity and subjective outcomes than single bundle ACL reconstruction

PURPOSE

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare arthroscopic single bundle (SB) and double bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions in the light of all available randomised controlled trials (RCTs). A meta-analysis of this well-researched topic was performed and subgroup analyses of the medial portal (MP) technique and the transtibial technique (TT) were added as a new idea. The hypothesis was that the DB technique is superior to the SB technique also in subgroup analyses of the MP and TT techniques.

METHODS

Instructions of the PRISMA checklist were followed. Systematic literature search from electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane library and Scopus was performed to find RCTs that compared the SB and DB techniques. Nine outcomes were used to compare these two techniques. Each study was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool and three subgroup analyses (minimum 2-years' follow-up, TT technique and MP technique) were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 40 studies were included in this meta-analysis. When analysing all the included studies, the DB technique was superior to the SB technique in KT-1000/2000 evaluation (p < 0.01), IKDC subjective evaluation (p < 0.05), Lysholm scores (p = 0.02), pivot shift (p < 0.01) and IKDC objective evaluation (p = 0.02). Similar results were also found in the subgroup analyses of minimum 2-years' follow-up and the TT technique. However, there were no differences between the two techniques in a subgroup analysis of the MP technique.

CONCLUSION

Generally, DB ACL reconstruction leads to better restoration of knee laxity and subjective outcomes than SB ACL reconstruction. The subgroup analysis of the MP technique revealed that surgeons can achieve equally as good results with both techniques when femoral tunnels are drilled through the medial portal.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Comparing post-operative pain between single bundle and double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a retrospective study

Background

In anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, the clinical outcome and level of post-operative pain are important factors. To date there have been no studies evaluating differences in post-operative pain between single bundle and double bundle ACL reconstruction with a hamstring graft.

Hypothesis/purpose

We hypothesized that post-operative pain in single bundle ACL reconstruction would be less than in double bundle ACL reconstruction. This study was to compare post-operative pain between patients undergoing single bundle versus double bundle ACL reconstruction.

Study design

Cohort study.

Methods

This was a retrospective study comparing post-operative pain scores between single bundle and double bundle ACL reconstruction. Each patient was given our standard regimen of oral diclofenac (25 mg/tab) three times per day and paracetamol (500 mg/tab) six times per day for 1 day post-operatively. If the patient complained of moderate to severe pain (pain numeric rating scale (PNRS) > 3), 3 mg of morphine was injected intravenously every 3 h for 24 h and 1 mg of morphine as a rescue medication every 1 h for 24 h. PNRS and morphine consumption were recorded at 4-h intervals for 24 h.

Results

209 patients were included in this study of whom 102 and 107 patients received single bundle and double bundle ACL reconstruction, respectively. The average post-operative pain scores of the single bundle group were lower at all time points. Linear mixed effect regression analyses showed that the single bungle group had lower post-operative pain than the double bundle group after adjusting for confounders (beta = − 0.45; 95% CI = − 0.838, − 0.062) but there was no statistically significant difference between numbers of bundle ACL reconstruction with regard to morphine consumption.

Conclusion

Single bundle ACL reconstruction had significantly lower post-operative pain scores than double bundle ACL reconstruction.

Clinical relevance

Double bundle ACL reconstruction results in higher post-operative pain, which may slow the start of rehabilitation and reduce patient satisfaction. In middle-aged adult patients with low-demand activities, we suggest performing a single bundle ACL reconstruction.

Health Economic Evaluations of Hip and Knee Interventions in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine: A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment

BACKGROUND

The economic burden of musculoskeletal diseases is substantial and growing. Economic evaluations compare costs and health benefits of interventions simultaneously to help inform value-based care; thus, it is crucial to ensure that studies are using appropriate methodology to provide valid evidence on the cost-effectiveness of interventions. This is particularly the case in orthopaedic sports medicine, where several interventions of varying costs are available to treat common hip and knee conditions.

PURPOSE

To summarize and evaluate the quality of economic evaluations in orthopaedic sports medicine for knee and hip interventions and identify areas for quality improvement.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

The Medline, AMED, OVID Health Star, and EMBASE databases were searched from inception to March 1, 2020, to identify economic evaluations that compared ≥2 interventions for hip and/or knee conditions in orthopaedic sports medicine. We assessed the quality of full economic evaluations using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) tool, which consists of 16 questions for a total score of 100. We classified studies into quartiles based on QHES score (extremely poor quality to high quality) and we evaluated the frequency of studies that addressed each of the 16 QHES questions.

RESULTS

A total of 93 studies were included in the systematic review. There were 41 (44%) cost analyses, of which 21 (51%) inappropriately concluded interventions were cost-effective. Only 52 (56%) of the included studies were full economic evaluations, although 40 of these (77%) fell in the high-quality quartile. The mean QHES score was 83.2 ± 19. Authors consistently addressed 12 of the QHES questions; questions that were missed or unclear were related to statistical uncertainty, appropriateness of costing methodology, and discussion of potential biases. The most frequently missed question was whether the cost perspective of the analysis was stated and justified.

CONCLUSION

The number of studies in orthopaedic sports medicine is small, despite their overall good quality. Yet, there are still many highly cited studies based on low-quality or partial economic evaluations that are being used to influence clinical decision-making. Investigators should follow international health economic guidelines for study design and critical appraisal of studies to further improve quality.

CLINICAL OUTCOMES AFTER TWO-STAGE BICRUCIATE KNEE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION

Objective:

To correlate clinical and intraoperative findings with the postoperative evaluation of two-stage bicruciate knee ligament reconstruction.

Methods:

The study was conducted with 25 patients (20 men and 05 women) with mean age of 32.3 years, mean body mass index (BMI) of 26.2, and mean lesion duration of 18.3 months. The treatment consisted of an Inlay reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) followed by the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, at least 3 months after the first surgical procedure. Four patients required additional procedures: patellar tendon (02), medial collateral ligament (MCL) (02).

Results:

With an average follow-up of 24.8 months, 60% of the patients scored zero or + at the posterior drawer test, while 40% scored ++; 60% of patients were evaluated as good/excellent according to the Lysholm scale. Only one patient reached the pre-injury Tegner activity level. Injury duration had a negative influence on functional limitation, vitality, and mental health (SF-36).

Conclusion:

Although two-stage bicruciate knee ligament reconstruction improved knee stability and self-assessment, 96% of patients did not recover their pre-injury state. In the 36-item short form survey (SF-36), injury duration was inversely correlated with self-assessment of functional capacity, physical limitation, vitality, and mental health. Level of Evidence II, retrospective study.

THE EFFECTS OF MULTIPLE MODALITIES OF COGNITIVE LOADING ON DYNAMIC POSTURAL CONTROL IN INDIVIDUALS WITH CHRONIC ANKLE INSTABILITY

BACKGROUND

Evidence of neuroplasticity after joint injury has suggested that individuals with chronic ankle instability (CAI) may have degraded movement when facing cognitive demand. To date, research into these effects have been limited to static balance models, and typically only incorporate a single type of cognitive demands.

RESEARCH QUESTION

We aimed to determine the effects of multiple modalities of cognitive load (quantitative, verbal-memory, visuospatial) on dynamic postural control strategies in a sample of patients with CAI compared to uninjured controls.

METHODS

Thirty-two participants (16 CAI, 16 healthy) performed a series of 20 hops-to-stabilization while either under no cognitive load (CON), or while performing Benton's judgment of line orientation (JLO), the symbol digit modalities test (SDM), or a serial seven task (SVN). Dynamic postural stability indices and mean muscle activation from the lower leg muscles were extracted and assessed via analysis of variance.

RESULTS

Healthy subjects demonstrated better vertical and dynamic postural stability indices under JLO (P ≤ 0.017) and SVN (P ≤ 0.010) conditions compared to CON. Postural stability was unaffected in CAI (P > 0.050). Peroneus longus and lateral gastrocnemius activation was lowest in SVN across all subjects (P ≤ 0.033). Lateral gastrocnemius activation was greatest in SDM (P ≤ 0.033).

SIGNIFICANCE

These results suggest improvements in postural stability under cognitive demand in healthy individuals that did not occur in CAI, suggesting less movement optimization. Quantitative tasks appear to impede stabilizing muscle activation in the leg, while verbal-memory tasks result in a more protective landing strategy.

The Effects of Cognitive Loading on Motor Behavior in Injured Individuals: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Research suggests that individuals with musculoskeletal injury may have difficulty negotiating physical tasks when they are combined with cognitive loads.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to conduct a systematic review to understand the effects of increased cognitive demand on movement patterns among individuals with musculoskeletal injuries.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index for Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and SPORTDiscus was conducted to find research reports that included a population that had previously experienced an ankle, knee, or low back injury, included an uninjured control group, and assessed a dual-task paradigm.

RESULTS

Forty-five full-text research reports were assessed, of which 28 studies (six ankle injury, nine knee injury, and 13 low back pain studies) were included in the review. Included studies were assessed for methodological quality and the study design extracted for analysis including the participants, cognitive and physical tasks performed, as well as outcome measures (e.g., three-dimensional kinematics, center of pressure, etc.). All studies included were cross-sectional or case-control with methodological quality scores of 17.8 ± 2.2 out of a possible 22. Twenty-five of the 28 studies found changes in motor performance with dual-task conditions compared with single tasks. Furthermore, 54% of studies reported a significant group by task interaction effect, reporting at least one alteration in injured groups' motor performance under dual-task conditions when compared with an uninjured group.

CONCLUSION

The results of this systematic review indicate that motor performance is further impaired by placing a cognitive load on individuals in populations with musculoskeletal injury. More demanding tasks such as gait appear to be more affected in injured individuals than simple balance tasks. Future investigators may want to consider the difficulty of the tasks included as well as the impact of dual-task paradigms on rehabilitation programs.

Superior 2-Year Functional Outcomes Among Young Female Athletes After ACL Reconstruction in 10 Return-to-Sport Training Sessions: Comparison of ACL-SPORTS Randomized Controlled Trial With Delaware-Oslo and MOON Cohorts

BACKGROUND

Outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are not uniformly good and are worse among young female athletes. Developing better rehabilitation and return-to-sport training programs and evaluating their outcomes are essential.

PURPOSE

(1) Test the effect of strength, agility, plyometric, and secondary prevention (SAPP) exercises with and without perturbation training (SAPP + PERT) on strength, hops, function, activity levels, and return-to-sport rates in young female athletes 1 and 2 years after ACLR and (2) compare 2-year functional outcomes and activity levels among young female athletes in the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Specialized Post-Operative Return-to-Sports (ACL-SPORTS) trial to homogeneous cohorts who completed criterion-based postoperative rehabilitation alone (Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network [MOON]) and in combination with extended preoperative rehabilitation (Delaware-Oslo).

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial, Level of evidence, 1; and cohort study, Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A total of 40 level 1 and level 2 female athletes were enrolled after postoperative impairment resolution 3 to 9 months after primary ACLR. Participants were randomized to 10 SAPP or SAPP + PERT sessions and were tested 1 and 2 years after ACLR on quadriceps strength, hop tests, functional outcomes, and return-to-sport rates. Participants were then compared with homogeneous cohorts of young (<25 years) female athletes who completed criterion-based postoperative rehabilitation alone (MOON) and in combination with extended preoperative rehabilitation (Delaware-Oslo) on 2-year functional outcomes.

RESULTS

No significant or meaningful differences were found between SAPP and SAPP + PERT, so groups were collapsed for comparison with the other cohorts. At 2-year follow-up, ACL-SPORTS had the highest scores (P < .01) on the Marx activity rating scale (ACL-SPORTS, 13.5 ± 3.3; Delaware-Oslo, 12.5 ± 2.7; MOON, 10.6 ± 5.1); International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form (96 ± 7, 92 ± 9, and 84 ± 14, respectively); and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales for Pain (98 ± 4, 94 ± 9, and 90 ± 10, respectively), Symptoms (94 ± 6, 90 ± 9, and 83 ± 14, respectively), Activities of Daily Living (100 ± 1, 99 ± 4, and 96 ± 7, respectively), Sports and Recreation (94 ± 8, 86 ± 15, and 82 ± 17, respectively), and Quality of Life (89 ± 14, 78 ± 18, and 76 ± 19, respectively). The Patient Acceptable Symptom State threshold on the KOOS-Sports and Recreation was achieved by 100% of the ACL-SPORTS cohort compared with 90% of Delaware-Oslo and 78% of MOON (P = .011).

CONCLUSION

Although perturbation training provided no added benefit, 10 sessions of return-to-sport training, compared with criterion-based postoperative rehabilitation alone, yielded statistically significant and clinically meaningfully higher 2-year functional outcomes among young, high-level female athletes after ACLR.

REGISTRATION

NCT01773317 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

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.

Cost-utility analysis of dynamic intraligamentary stabilization versus early reconstruction after rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) technique in comparison with reconstructive surgery (ACLR) in the treatment of isolated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures from the perspective of the community of insured citizens in Germany.

METHODS

Because of the specific decision problem at hand, namely that with DIS the procedure has to take place within 21 days after the initial trauma, a decision tree was developed. The time horizon of the model was set to 3 years. Input data was taken from official tariffs, payer data, the literature and assumptions based on expert opinion when necessary.

RESULTS

The decision tree analysis identified the DIS strategy as the superior one with 2.34 QALY versus 2.26 QALY for the ACLR branch. The higher QALY also came with higher costs of 5,398.05 € for the DIS branch versus 4,632.68 € for the ACLR branch respectively, leading to an ICER of 9,092.66 € per QALY. Results were robust after sensitivity analysis. Uncertainty was examined via probabilistic sensitivity analysis resulting in a slightly higher ICER of 9,567.13 € per QALY gained.

CONCLUSION

The DIS technology delivers an effective treatment for the ACL rupture at a favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

Anatomic Outside-In Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Using Femoral Fixation with Metallic Interference Screw and Surgical Staples (Agrafe) in the Tibia: An Effective Low-Cost Technique

Background:

An anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is a frequent injury, with short and long-term consequences if left untreated. With a view to benefitting as many patients as possible and preventing future complications, we created a low-cost ligament reconstruction technique.

Method:

The present article describes an anatomic ACL reconstruction technique.

Results:

The technique involves single-band reconstruction, using flexors tendon graft, outside-in tunnel perforation, femoral fixation with metal interference screw and surgical staples (Agrafe) in the longitudinal position.

Conclusion:

We present a simple, easy-to-reproduce technique that, when executed on patients with good bone quality, primarily in the tibia, is effective and inexpensive, favoring its large scale application.

Double-Bundle Versus Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Prospective Randomized Study With 10-Year Results

BACKGROUND

A long-term follow-up comparing double-bundle and single-bundle techniques for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has not been reported before.

HYPOTHESIS

Double-bundle ACL reconstruction may have fewer graft ruptures, lower rates of osteoarthritis (OA), and better stability than single-bundle reconstruction.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

Ninety patients were randomized for double-bundle ACL reconstruction with bioabsorbable screw fixation (DB group; n = 30), single-bundle ACL reconstruction with bioabsorbable screw fixation (SBB group; n = 30), and single-bundle ACL reconstruction with metallic screw fixation (SBM group; n = 30). Evaluation methods consisted of a clinical examination, KT-1000 arthrometer measurements, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm knee scores, and a radiographic examination of both the operated and contralateral knees.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients (90%) were available at the 10-year follow-up. Eleven patients (1 in the DB group, 7 in the SBB group, and 3 in the SBM group) had a graft failure during the follow-up and went on to undergo revision ACL surgery ( P = .043). In the remaining 70 patients at 10 years, no significant group differences were found in the pivot-shift test findings, KT-1000 arthrometer measurements, or knee scores. The most OA findings were found in the medial compartment of the knee, with 38% of the patients in the operated knee and 28% of the patients in the contralateral nonoperated knee. However, no significant group difference was found. The most severe OA changes were in the patients who had the longest delay from the primary injury to ACL reconstruction ( P = .047) and in the patients who underwent partial meniscal resection at the time of ACL reconstruction ( P = .024).

CONCLUSION

Double-bundle ACL reconstruction resulted in significantly fewer graft failures than single-bundle ACL reconstruction during the follow-up. Knee stability and OA rates were similar at 10 years. The most severe OA changes were found in the patients who had the longest delay from the primary injury to ACL reconstruction and in the patients who underwent partial meniscal resection at the time of ACL reconstruction.

Single- or Double-Bundle Technique in the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction — Current Concepts and Review of the Literature

The treatment for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficient knee consists in its surgical reconstruction. There are several available and validated techniques, but there are still numerous questions to be answered concerning the best approach in terms of stability, functional outcome, and avoiding further damage in the knee. This paper sought to analyze the studies published in the literature comparing the outcomes of ACL restoration with single-bundle versus double-bundle techniques. The results demonstrate that even if biomechanical studies find an increased steadiness with double-bundle ACL reconstruction, there seems to be no clinical or functional benefit compared with single-bundle reconstruction.

Changing Sagittal-Plane Landing Styles to Modulate Impact and Tibiofemoral Force Magnitude and Directions Relative to the Tibia

CONTEXT

Ground reaction force (GRF) and tibiofemoral force magnitudes and directions have been shown to affect anterior cruciate ligament loading during landing. However, the kinematic and kinetic factors modifying these 2 forces during landing are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To clarify the intersegmental kinematic and kinetic links underlying the alteration of the GRF and tibiofemoral force vectors secondary to changes in the sagittal-plane body position during single-legged landing.

DESIGN

Crossover study.

SETTING

Laboratory.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

Twenty recreationally active participants (age = 23.4 ± 3.6 years, height = 171.0 ± 9.4 cm, mass = 73.3 ± 12.7 kg).

INTERVENTION(S)

Participants performed single-legged landings using 3 landing styles: self-selected landing (SSL), body leaning forward and landing on the toes (LFL), and body upright with flat-footed landing (URL). Three-dimensional kinetics and kinematics were recorded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Sagittal-plane tibial inclination and knee-flexion angles, GRF magnitude and inclination angles relative to the tibia, and proximal tibial forces at peak tibial axial forces.

RESULTS

The URL resulted in less time to peak tibial axial forces, smaller knee-flexion angles, and greater magnitude and a more anteriorly inclined GRF vector relative to the tibia than did the SSL. These changes led to the greatest peak tibial axial and anterior shear forces in the URL among the 3 landing styles. Conversely, the LFL resulted in longer time to peak tibial axial forces, greater knee-flexion angles, and reduced magnitude and a more posteriorly inclined GRF vector relative to the tibia than the SSL. These changes in LFL resulted in the lowest peak tibial axial and largest posterior shear forces among the 3 landing styles.

CONCLUSIONS

Sagittal-plane intersegmental kinematic and kinetic links strongly affected the magnitude and direction of GRF and tibiofemoral forces during the impact phase of single-legged landing. Therefore, improving sagittal-plane landing mechanics is important in reducing harmful magnitudes and directions of impact forces on the anterior cruciate ligament.

Economic Analyses in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Qualitative and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

As the health care system in the United States (US) transitions toward value-based care, there is an increased emphasis on understanding the cost drivers and high-value procedures within orthopaedics. To date, there has been no systematic review of the economic literature on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

PURPOSE

To evaluate the overall evidence base for economic studies published on ACLR in the orthopaedic literature. Data available on the economics of ACLR are summarized and cost drivers associated with the procedure are identified.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

All economic studies (including US-based and non-US-based) published between inception of the MEDLINE database and October 3, 2014, were identified. Given the heterogeneity of the existing evidence base, a qualitative, descriptive approach was used to assess the collective results from the economic studies on ACLR. When applicable, comparisons were made for the following cost-related variables associated with the procedure for economic implications: outpatient versus inpatient surgery (or outpatient vs overnight hospital stay vs >1-night stay); bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) graft versus hamstring (HS) graft source; autograft versus allograft source; staged unilateral ACLR versus bilateral ACLR in a single setting; single- versus double-bundle technique; ACLR versus nonoperative treatment; and other unique comparisons reported in single studies, including computer-assisted navigation surgery (CANS) versus traditional surgery, early versus delayed ACLR, single- versus double-incision technique, and finally the costs of ACLR without comparison of variables.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies were identified and included; of these, 17 included studies were cost identification studies. The remaining 7 studies were cost utility analyses that used economic models to investigate the effect of variables such as the cost of allograft tissue, fixation devices, and physical therapy, the percentage and timing of revision surgery, and the cost of revision surgery. Of the 24 studies, there were 3 studies with level 1 evidence, 8 with level 2 evidence, 6 with level 3 evidence, and 7 with level 4 evidence. The following economic comparisons were demonstrated: (1) ACLR is more cost-effective than nonoperative treatment with rehabilitation only (per 3 cost utility analyses); (2) autograft use had lower total costs than allograft use, with operating room supply costs and allograft costs most significant (per 5 cost identification studies and 1 cost utility analysis); (3) results on hamstring versus BPTB graft source are conflicting (per 2 cost identification studies); (4) there is significant cost reduction with an outpatient versus inpatient setting (per 5 studies using cost identification analyses); (5) bilateral ACLR is more cost efficient than 2 unilateral ACLRs in separate settings (per 2 cost identification studies); (6) there are lower costs with similarly successful outcomes between single- and double-bundle technique (per 3 cost identification studies and 2 cost utility analyses).

CONCLUSION

Results from this review suggest that early single-bundle, single (endoscopic)-incision outpatient ACLR using either BPTB or HS autograft provides the most value. In the setting of bilateral ACL rupture, single-setting bilateral ACLR is more cost-effective than staged unilateral ACLR. Procedures using CANS technology do not yet yield results that are superior to the results of a standard surgical procedure, and CANS has substantially greater costs.

Comparison of Anatomic Double- and Single-Bundle Techniques for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Hamstring Tendon Autografts: A Prospective Randomized Study With 5-Year Clinical and Radiographic Follow-up

BACKGROUND

The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare the outcomes of the anatomic double-bundle (DB) and anatomic single-bundle (SB) techniques 5 years after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Since more effective restoration of rotational laxity is considered the main advantage of the DB technique, the pivot-shift test was the primary outcome variable of the study.

HYPOTHESIS

Double-bundle ACL reconstruction will result in a better outcome in terms of the pivot-shift test.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A total of 105 patients (33 women, 72 men; median age, 27 years; range, 18-52 years) were randomized and underwent ACL reconstruction (DB group, n = 53; SB group, n = 52). All reconstructions were performed anatomically by identifying the ACL footprints, using the anteromedial portal for the femoral tunnel drilling, and utilizing interference screw for tibial and femoral fixation. A single blinded observer examined the patients preoperatively and at follow-up (median, 64 months; range, 55-75 months). Multiple subjective and objective clinical evaluation tests and radiographic assessments of osteoarthritis (OA) were performed using the Ahlbäck, Kellgren-Lawrence, and Fairbank grading systems at 6 weeks postoperatively and at the final follow-up evaluation.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, no differences were found between the study groups, apart from the preinjury Tegner activity level, which was lower in the DB group (SB: mean, 7.8 [range, 3-9]; DB: mean, 7.3 [range, 0-9]; P = .02). Eighty-seven patients (83%) were available for examination at the 5-year follow-up. Statistical differences could not be found between the groups in terms of the pivot-shift test, KT-1000 arthrometer laxity measurements, manual Lachman test, single-legged-hop test, square-hop test, range of motion, Lysholm knee scoring scale, Tegner activity scale, or Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Correspondingly, no differences were found between the groups regarding the presence of OA at follow-up. However, a significant increase of OA was found within the DB group at the 5-year follow-up. Both groups improved at follow-up compared with the preoperative assessment in terms of the laxity tests, hop tests, and scoring scales.

CONCLUSION

At the 5-year follow-up of an unselected group of patients, anatomic DB reconstruction was not superior to anatomic SB reconstruction in terms of the pivot-shift test.

Comparison of Graft Failure Rate Between Autografts Placed via an Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Technique: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Meta-regression

BACKGROUND

Recent data from the Danish anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) registry demonstrated increased reoperation rates for hamstring tendon autografts when an anatomic ACL reconstruction is performed. This is consistent with reports of greater time needed for hamstring tendon autografts to mature compared with other autografts.

PURPOSE

To review the literature comparing graft failure rate between patellar and hamstring tendon autografts placed anatomically and to determine if there are differences in return to preinjury activity levels between autografts.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression.

METHODS

The PubMed, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, and CINAHL databases were used to identify studies published from January 1, 2000, through March 7, 2014. To compare postoperative outcomes between patellar tendon and hamstring tendon autografts, summary event rates for graft failure and return to preinjury activity level were calculated. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate a summary odds ratio (OR) for graft failure between autografts using the studies that directly compared the 2 autografts. Meta-regression analyses were performed to assess the influence of postoperative follow-up time on graft failure rate.

RESULTS

A total of 28 studies reported graft failures for patellar tendon (6 studies) and hamstring tendon (26 studies) autografts used with anatomic ACL reconstruction; 4 of the 28 were comparison studies. Graft failure rate was not significantly different between patellar tendon (7.0% [95% CI, 4.6%-10.5%]) and hamstring tendon autografts (3.9% [95% CI, 2.7%-5.6%]). The odds of graft failure were slightly higher for hamstring tendon autografts (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.63-2.33]), but this difference was not significant (P = .57). The rate of patients returning to preinjury activity levels was not significantly different between patellar (n = 1 study; 58.1% [95% CI, 40.4%-73.9%]) and hamstring tendon autografts (n = 5 studies; 75.6% [95% CI, 43.7%-92.5%]). Overall graft failure rate was positively associated with postoperative follow-up time, but this effect was only significant with hamstring tendon autografts (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Differences in graft failure rate between patellar tendon and hamstring tendon autografts were not significant. Although follow-up time was only found to have a significant influence on hamstring tendon graft failure rates, this was likely due to the smaller sample of studies assessing patellar tendon graft failures. Differences in return to preinjury activity levels could not be determined due to the lack of studies assessing that outcome. Both patellar and hamstring tendon autografts demonstrate a low risk of failure and moderately high return to activity level after anatomic ACL reconstruction.

A systematic review of single- versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction using the anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction scoring checklist

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to apply the anatomic ACL reconstruction scoring checklist (AARSC) and to evaluate the degree to which clinical studies comparing single-bundle (SB) and double-bundle (DB) ACL reconstructions are anatomic.

METHODS

A systematic electronic search was performed using the databases PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE and Cochrane Library. Studies published from January 1995 to January 2014 comparing SB and DB ACL reconstructions with clinical outcome measurements were included. The items from the AARSC were recorded for both the SB and DB groups in each study.

RESULTS

Eight-thousand nine-hundred and ninety-four studies were analysed, 77 were included. Randomized clinical trials (29; 38%) and prospective comparative studies (29; 38%) were the most frequent study type. Most studies were published in 2011 (19; 25%). The most commonly reported items for both SB and DB groups were as follows: graft type (152; 99%), femoral and tibial fixation method (149; 97% respectively), knee flexion angle during graft tensioning (124; 8%) and placement of the tibial tunnel at the ACL insertion site (101; 66%). The highest level of documentation used for ACL tunnel position for both groups was often one dimensional, e.g. drawing, operative notes or o'clock reference. The DB reconstruction was in general more thoroughly reported. The means for the AARSC were 6.9 ± 2.8 for the SB group and 8.3 ± 2.8 for the DB group. Both means were below a proposed required minimum score of 10 for anatomic ACL reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

There was substantial underreporting of surgical data for both the SB and DB groups in clinical studies. This underreporting creates difficulties when analysing, comparing and pooling results of scientific studies on this subject.

A prospective study to evaluate the clinico-radiological outcomes of arthroscopic single bundle versus double bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

PATIENT AND METHODS

60 patients with isolated ACL injury were divided into single bundle (SB) (n = 30) and double bundle (DB) reconstruction groups (n = 30) and operated between July 2009 and July 2012. Outcome evaluation was performed using GNRB arthrometer, International Knee Documentation Committee & Lysholm scale. Rotational stability was determined by lateral pivot-shift test. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed postoperatively to compare the reconstructed ACL graft orientation.

RESULTS

Average follow-up was 34.8 months in SB and 36.2 months in DB group. At final follow-up, mean Lysholm score was 94.13 ± 2.67 in SB and 93.13 ± 3.31 in DB group (P value = 0.202, statistically non-significant). All patients in both groups were in grade A or B according to objective IKDC scores. Mean differential anterior tibial translation was 1.45 ± 0.6 mm in SB and 1.17 ± 0.8 mm in DB group (P value = 0.105, NS). All had negative pivot shift test in DB group while 2 patients had positive pivot shift in SB group. MRI of operated knees showed that values of mean sagittal ACL graft-tibial angle and mean coronal ACL graft-tibial angle were comparable in both groups (P value > 0.05, NS).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no statistically significant difference concerning knee stability, knee scores, subjective evaluations, and MRI evaluation of graft inclination angles between single- and double-bundle ACL reconstruction groups at an average of 35 months of follow-up.

High Variability in Outcome Reporting Patterns in High-Impact ACL Literature

BACKGROUND

ACL (anterior cruciate ligament) reconstruction is one of the most commonly performed and studied procedures in modern sports medicine. A multitude of objective and subjective patient outcome measures exists; however, nonstandardized reporting patterns of these metrics may create challenges in objectively analyzing pooled results from different studies. The goal of this study was to document the variability in outcome reporting patterns in high-impact orthopaedic studies of ACL reconstruction.

METHODS

All clinical studies pertaining to ACL reconstruction in four high-impact-factor orthopaedic journals over a five-year period were reviewed. Biomechanical, basic science, and imaging studies were excluded, as were studies with fewer than fifty patients, yielding 119 studies for review. Incorporation of various objective and subjective outcomes was noted for each study.

RESULTS

Substantial variability in reporting of both objective and subjective measures was noted in the study cohort. Although a majority of studies reported instrumented laxity findings, there was substantial variability in the type and method of laxity reporting. Most other objective outcomes, including range of motion, strength, and complications, were reported in <50% of all studies. Return to pre-injury level of activity was infrequently reported (24% of studies), as were patient satisfaction and pain assessment following surgery (8% and 13%, respectively). Of the patient-reported outcomes, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm, and Tegner scores were most often reported (71%, 63%, and 42%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial variability in outcome reporting patterns exists among high-impact studies of ACL reconstruction. Such variability may create challenges in interpreting results and pooling them across different studies.

The size of tibial footprint of anterior cruciate ligament and association with physical characteristics in Asian females

INTRODUCTION

The tibial footprint is important for preoperative planning of operative technique and graft selection. Knowledge of tibial footprint in Asians is scant including the relationship between tibial footprint and physical characteristics. The aim of this study was to identify the size of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tibial footprint and the proportion of size <14 mm, and to evaluate the association of tibial footprint with physical characteristics in Asian females.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 127 patients with intact or minimal change in ACL were included. The tibial footprint was carefully measured during total knee arthroplasty. As potential predictors, leg length, femoral length, tibial length, and anteroposterior and mediolateral diameter of the proximal tibia were measured on radiographs, as well as body height and weight. The relationship of ACL tibial footprint length <14 mm with physical characteristics was analyzed using univariable and multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

The tibial footprint was 13.8 mm (range 10.0-18.0) in length and 9.8 mm (range 6.3-13.5) in width. The proportion of footprints <14 mm in length was 53.5 %. Patient height, leg length, femoral length, and tibial length were correlated with tibial footprint. Tibial length was the best predictor of ACL tibial footprint length <14 mm (Odds ratio 1.75; 95 % confidence interval 1.08-2.82).

CONCLUSIONS

Tibial footprint size shows a large variation with a high proportion of <14 mm length. Tibial length can help predict the ACL tibial footprint in the preoperative planning of ACL reconstruction.

A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Patellar Tendon, Hamstring Tendon, and Double-Bundle ACL Reconstructions: Patient-Reported and Clinical Outcomes at a Minimal 2-Year Follow-up

OBJECTIVE

To compare 3 anatomically positioned autografts for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, by measuring patient-reported disease-specific quality of life at 2 years postoperatively.

DESIGN

Double-blinded, randomized clinical trial with intraoperative computer-generated treatment allocation. Patients and an independent trained evaluator were blinded.

SETTING

University-based orthopedic referral practice.

PATIENTS

Three hundred thirty patients (14-50 years; 183 male patients) with isolated ACL deficiency were equally randomized to: (1) patellar tendon, PT: 28.7 years (SD = 9.7); (2) quadruple-stranded hamstring tendon, HT: 28.5 years (SD = 9.9); and (3) double bundle using HT, DB: 28.3 years (SD = 9.8); 322 patients completed 2-year follow-up.

INTERVENTION

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using PT, HT, or DB autografts.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Measured at baseline, 1 and 2 years postoperatively-primary: anterior cruciate ligament quality-of-life scores; secondary: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, KT-1000 arthrometer, pivot shift, range of motion, Tegner activity, Cincinnati Occupational Scale, and single-leg hop. Proportions of correct graft type guesses by the patients and evaluator assessed blinding effectiveness.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were not different. Anterior cruciate ligament quality-of-life scores increased over time for all groups (P = 0.001) but were not different at 2 years (P = 0.591): PT = 84.6 (SD = 16.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 81.4-87.8), HT = 82.5 (SD = 17.7, 95% CI = 79.2-85.9), and DB = 82.4 (SD = 17.5, 95% CI = 79.1-85.7). Two-year KT-1000 side-to-side differences (PT = 1.86 mm; HT = 2.97 mm; DB = 2.65 mm) were statistically significant between PT-HT (P = 0.002) and PT-DB (P = 0.044). The remaining secondary outcomes were not statistically different. Correct graft type guesses occurred 51% of the time for patients and 46% for the evaluator.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-year disease-specific quality-of-life outcome was not different between the ACL reconstruction techniques. The PT reconstructions had significantly lower side-to-side differences on static stability measures. Patient and evaluator blinding was achieved.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 1 (Therapeutic Studies).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This high-quality, large, double-blind randomized clinical trial (RCT) addresses the insufficient evidence in the literature comparing PT, single-bundle hamstring, and DB hamstring reconstructions for ACL rupture in adults. In addition to the clinical and functional results, this RCT uniquely reports on the disease-specific, patient-reported quality-of-life outcome at 2 years postoperatively.

Does Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Improve Postoperative Knee Stability Compared With Single-Bundle Techniques? A Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-analyses

PURPOSE

Multiple meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, the highest available level of evidence, have been conducted to determine whether double-bundle (DB) or single-bundle (SB) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) provides superior clinical outcomes and knee stability; however, results are discordant. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of meta-analyses comparing SB and DB ACL-R to discern the cause of the discordance and to determine which of these meta-analyses provides the current best available evidence.

METHODS

We evaluated available scientific support for SB as compared with DB ACL-R by systematically reviewing the literature for published meta-analyses. Data on patient clinical outcomes and knee stability (as measured by KT arthrometry and pivot-shift testing) were extracted. Meta-analysis quality was judged using the Oxman-Guyatt and Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses systems. The Jadad algorithm was then applied to determine which meta-analyses provided the highest level of evidence.

RESULTS

Nine meta-analyses were included, of which 3 included Level I Evidence and 6 included both Level I and Level II Evidence. Most studies found significant differences favoring DB reconstruction on pivot-shift testing, KT arthrometry measurement of anterior tibial translation, and International Knee Documentation Committee objective grading. Most studies detected no significant differences between the 2 techniques in subjective outcome scores (Tegner, Lysholm, and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective), graft failure, or complications. Oxman-Guyatt and Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses scores varied, with 2 studies exhibiting major flaws (Oxman-Guyatt score <3). After application of the Jadad decision algorithm, 3 concordant high-quality meta-analyses were selected, with each concluding that DB ACL-R provided significantly better knee stability (by KT arthrometry and pivot-shift testing) than SB ACL-R but no advantages in clinical outcomes or risk of graft failure.

CONCLUSIONS

The current best available evidence suggests that DB ACL-R provides better postoperative knee stability than SB ACL-R, whereas clinical outcomes and risk of graft failure are similar between techniques.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, systematic review of Level I and II studies.

Is double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction superior to single-bundle? A comprehensive systematic review

PURPOSE

To describe current evidence on single- and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, in terms of differences in knee kinematics, functional outcomes, patient-reported outcomes and graft failures.

METHODS

An electronic search was made using PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE and Cochrane Library. Studies published from January 1995 to August 2011 were included, and an updated search was made in PubMed in July 2012. Therapeutic studies, level of evidence I-III, for isolated primary ACL tears written in English comparing single- and double-bundle reconstruction reporting clinical outcome were included. Quality appraisal based on Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was performed.

RESULTS

Of 7,154 potentially eligible studies, 60 papers were included (25 randomised controlled trials, 21 prospective comparative studies, 14 retrospective comparative studies), comprising 4,146 patients (2,072 single-bundle, 2,074 double-bundle). Minor differences were found between study types. An analysis of graft failures revealed fewer re-ruptures in double-bundle reconstruction than single-bundle, 19 and 44, respectively. Up to 45 % of the studies reported a superior outcome in double-bundle reconstruction in terms of antero-posterior laxity, measured with the Lachman, anterior drawer, KT-1000/2000 and navigation. Measurements of rotatory laxity revealed superior results in double-bundle reconstruction measured with pivot shift and navigation in 18/42 (8/15 anatomically reconstructed) and 9/20 studies, respectively. Patient-reported outcome measures and functional outcomes did not differ to a large extent; however, differences when identified were almost exclusively in favour of double-bundle reconstruction.

CONCLUSION

Based on current evidence, double-bundle reconstruction appears to have fewer re-ruptures and less antero-posterior and rotatory laxity. Furthermore, no differences were found in short-term patient-reported outcome measures or objective findings. However, detailed statistical analyses of the included studies divided into homogeneous groups are needed to avoid reporting bias and to confirm any statistical difference.

Three-dimensional computed tomography evaluation of anterior cruciate ligament footprint for anatomic single-bundle reconstruction

PURPOSE

Femoral and tibial footprint coordinates have been well studied in double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, in a single-bundle reconstruction approach, the central coordinate of femoral and tibial footprints have not been determined. The purpose of this study was to describe the central point locations of the ACL footprints visualized by three-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT) images and analysed by the quadrant method.

METHODS

Eight cadaveric knees were dissected, and the central points of ACL femoral and tibial footprints were marked and analysed using 3D CT images.

RESULTS

In the present study, the means (and standard deviation) of ACL femoral footprint dimensions were in the ventral-dorsal plane and in the cranial-caudal plane 9.4 ± 0.8 and 15.6 ± 0.9 mm, respectively. In the tibial side, the means of ACL footprint dimensions were in the anterior-posterior and in the medial-lateral 18.5 ± 1.9 and 15.5 ± 1.0 mm, respectively. In the tomographic analyses, the means of femoral central location coordinates in the ventral-dorsal (y) and in the cranial-caudal (x) axes were 35.3 ± 4.5 and 30.0 ± 1.6 %, respectively. The means of tibial central location coordinates were in the anterior-posterior (y) and in the medial-lateral (x) axes, respectively: 40.5 ± 5.3 and 50.2 ± 1.3 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These computed tomographic coordinates might help future studies as a reference on ACL single-bundle anatomic reconstruction, with respect to the management of ACL revision surgery or in symptomatic patients after ACL reconstruction. Improvements in three-dimensional image acquisition could facilitate its intraoperative applicability in the coming years.

Measuring Outcomes: Pain and Quality of Life 48 Months After Acute Postoperative Total Knee Prosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Measuring HRQOL is simple, inexpensive, permits the health status to be measured over time, and is useful to compare or initiate treatments and evaluate results, facilitating homogenization in patient inclusion.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate disease-specific and generic HRQOL and influence of associated factors in patients undergoing open debridement for acute postsurgical knee prosthetic joint infection after TKR at 12 and 48 months after completing antibiotic treatment and considered cured of infection.

METHODS

Health-related quality-of-life measures were administered at baseline (WOMAC) and 12 and 48 months (WOMAC and SF-36) in patients with prosthesis retention, no symptoms of infection, and CRP (≤ 1 mg/dL).

RESULTS

Thirty patients were included, and 24 were evaluated at 48 months. WOMAC scores improved significantly (P < 0.01) at 12 and 48 months. The effect size was 0.72 for stiffness, 2.01 for pain, and 2.15 for function. At 48 months, improvements were greater (P < 0.02) except for stiffness. The most frequently isolated microorganisms were Staphylococcus aureus (14 patients) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (9 patients). SF-36 physical role, bodily pain, emotional role, and mental health dimension scores at 12 and 48 months were significantly worse in patients with isolates of Staphylococcus aureus (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Health-related quality-of-life measures detected significant differences in outcomes in patients infected by S. aureus compared with patients infected by other microorganisms. HRQOL measures may provide useful complementary information on outcomes after acute postoperative infection.

Single-bundle versus double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an up-to-date meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the results of arthroscopic single-bundle and double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

We systematically searched electronic databases to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which arthroscopic single-bundle was compared with double-bundle for ACL reconstruction. The search strategy followed the requirements of the Cochrane Library Handbook. The outcomes of these studies were analysed in terms of graft failures, Lysholm score, negative pivot-shift test, KT1000 arthrometer measurements, knee extensor and flexor peak torques, knee extension and flexion deficit, and subjective and objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) final score. Methodological quality was assessed and data were extracted independently. Standard mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95 % confidence interval (CI) was calculated by a fixed effects or random effects model. Heterogeneity across the studies was assessed with the I-square and chi-square statistic. Forest plots were also generated.

RESULTS

We identified 17 RCTs comprising 1,381 patients who were treated by arthroscopic single-bundle versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction. The results of meta-analysis of these studies showed that arthroscopic double-bundle reconstruction was associated with a lower risk of graft failures (P=0.002) and a lower rate of positive pivot-shift test (P<0.0001). Compared with single-bundle reconstruction, double-bundle reconstruction had a lower KT1000 arthrometer measurement (P<0.00001), a lower knee extension deficit (P=0.006) and a higher subjective IKDC score (P=0.03). There was no statistically significant difference between single-bundle and double-bundle reconstruction in Lysholm score (P=0.91), knee extensor peak torques (P=0.97), knee flexor peak torques (P=0.96), knee flexion deficit (P=0.30) and objective IKDC score (P=0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the more favourable outcomes of graft failures, knee joint stability and knee joint function in double-bundle reconstruction, we concluded that arthroscopic double-bundle reconstruction should be considered as the primary treatment in ACL reconstruction.