Editorial Commentary: Indications for Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

ACL plus ALL reconstruction restores normal knee stability and does not lead to lateral pain or signs of lateral overstrain

ACL rupture is a common injury in recreational and professional athletes. Most ACL tears occur in combination with an ALL lesion. Combined reconstruction of the ACL and ALL reduces re-rupture rates by up to 3.1 times compared to isolated ACL reconstruction using hamstring tendons; however, it has not yet been established as the surgical standard. The purpose of this study was to investigate if patients benefit from ACL+ALL reconstruction in terms of translation and rotation stability, return to activity and return to sport, as well as to assess any potential negative effects of this technique.This is a multicentric study of retrospectively collected patients who were followed up 12.7 months postoperatively. The patient sample consisted of 55 patients (group 1: n=29, Munich/Germany, ACL+ALL, femoral ALL fixation with interference screw, and group 2: n=26, Bolzano/Italy, ACL+ALL, femoral ALL-fixation with SwiveLock). Clinical outcomes were evaluated through instrumental measurements with two different devices to assess translational anteroposterior and rotational stability and through patient-reported outcome measures (Lysholm Score, Activity Rating Scale, Tegner Score, VAS (PROMs)).A total of 55 patients (mean (± SD) age: 24.7 ± 7.8 years) with a mean follow-up of 12.7 ± 1.5 months were included. The mean anterior translation of all operated (ACL+ALL) knees was 3.2 ± 1.1 mm and was not significantly different from the values of the non-operated knees (2.6 ± 1.0 mm). The results of the anterior drawer test in internal rotation were 3.3 ± 1.1 mm for the operated knee vs. 2.7 ± 1.0 mm for the non-operated knee (p=0.0014). There were no further significant differences between the operated and non-operated knee regarding translation or internal and external rotation. The mean value for pain on the lateral side of the knee was 1.1 ± 1.3 on the VAS 0-10 pain scale. All other PROMs showed no relevant differences between pre-injury and post-operative.ALL reconstruction restores the function of the anterolateral ligament of the knee. In this study, knee joint stability regarding anteroposterior translation and rotation showed values almost identical to those of the healthy non-operated contralateral knee. It leads to excellent patient outcomes with near pre-injury levels regarding the relevant PROMs. In particular, combined reconstruction did not result in any clinically significant negative side-effects such as pain on the ALL incision site or signs of overstrain in the lateral knee.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis is Associated with Reduced Risk for Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in an Insurance Claims Database

PURPOSE

To analyze a large, cross-sectional sample of patients from an administrative database for trends in the yearly utilization of either isolated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction or concomitant ACL reconstruction with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) for the treatment of ACL injury, and to compare the cumulative incidence of 5-year reoperations and 90-day emergency visits for each treatment modality.

METHODS

International Classification of Diseases (ICD), Tenth Revision and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to query the PearlDiver database between October 2015 to October 2022 to identify patients with a diagnosis of ACL injury undergoing either isolated ACL reconstruction (ACLR) or ACL reconstruction with concomitant LET (ACLR/LET). Propensity score matching was performed on the basis of age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), overweight or obesity (BMI > 25.0) and tobacco use. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate 5-year cumulative incidence of reoperations (revision ACL reconstruction, meniscus debridement/repair, adhesion lysis, knee joint manipulation, total knee arthroplasty) for each group.

RESULTS

There were 1022 patients that underwent ACLR/LET, and 64,504 patients who underwent ACLR for a diagnosis of ACL injury; following 1:1 propensity matching, 1022 patients remained in each group. Patient counts for ACLR/LET increased yearly during the study period for every year except 2020, with greater than 20% increases annually after 2017. Kaplan-Meier analysis of revision ACL reconstruction in propensity-matched groups showed a 5-year cumulative incidence of 2.6% for patients undergoing ACLR/LET and 4.9% for ACLR [HR = 0.37 (95% CI 0.18-0.74), p = 0.005]. There were no significant differences between groups any other secondary event or postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

ACL reconstruction with LET is increasingly utilized to treat patients with ACL tears and demonstrates decreased risk for revision ACL reconstruction without increased risk for complications compared to patients treated with isolated ACL reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Retrospective Matched Comparative Series.

Sport-specific differences in ACL injury, treatment and return to sports: Basketball

Basketball is an intense, fast-paced game that is physically, highly demanding. Certain aspects of the game, such as the quick pivoting and cutting movements, predispose the players to serious knee injuries, including anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears. While an ACL tear can be a devastating condition for players, multidisciplinary management of the injury can provide the players with a reasonable chance to return to play at the pre-injury level. This article aims to review the general principles and guidelines for the management of ACL injury in basketball players. The diagnosis, surgical treatment, rehabilitation and return to sports are discussed from European and North American perspectives. With a comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach to this condition, medical professionals can provide injured basketball players with a favourable prognosis for returning to play at the pre-injury level. To return to normal life and basketball after ACL reconstruction, the proposed approach includes (1) the selection of the appropriate surgical graft and technique, (2) maintaining a healthy and persistent mental state during rehabilitation, and (3) following a scientific rehabilitation programme based on personalized recovery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

Anterolateral corner of knee: Current concepts

The anatomy of the antero-lateral corner (ALC) has been the topic of recent interest, as evidenced by the increasing number of publications. Knowledge needs to be improved amongst clinicians regarding the anatomy and biomechanical function of this vital structure and its implications on the rotational stability of the knee. There has yet to be a consensus on the role of surgical procedures and their indications for addressing the instability associated with the injury to these structures. Through this article, the authors have tried to outline the existing literature regarding Anterolateral knee instability, the associated structures, and the management of its injuries, emphasising the role of the anterolateral capsule and reconstructive procedures in combined ligamentous knee injuries.

Clinical Outcomes of Isolated ACL Reconstruction Versus Combined ACL and ALL Reconstruction With Indication Guided by Intraoperative Ultrasound: A Propensity Score-Matched Study of 260 Patients With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

Background

Additional anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction has been associated with improved clinical outcomes and reduced failure rates in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Despite the excellent clinical results reported, there is still a heated debate about its indications. Currently, the indications are mainly based on the patient's clinical criteria and not the imaging diagnosis of the injury of this ligament.

Purpose

To compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing isolated ACL reconstruction and combined ACL and ALL reconstruction conditioned to intraoperative ultrasound-guided diagnosis of the ALL lesion.

Study design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed. Patients undergoing primary ACL reconstruction between January 2017 and January 2022 were included. Patients were excluded if they had a previous history of ipsilateral knee surgery or if they underwent other concomitant procedures, including multiligament reconstruction surgery or osteotomy. The decision to perform an ALL reconstruction in addition to isolated ACL reconstruction was based on ultrasound diagnosis of this lesion. At the end of the study period, further knee injury and any other reoperations or complications were recorded and compared between patients who had isolated ACL reconstruction (no-ALLR group) and combined ACL and ALL. Propensity score matching was performed between groups. A multivariable analysis using the penalized Cox model was performed to explore the relationship between the graft rupture, surgical procedure type, and potential explanatory variables.

Results

A total of 339 patients met the predefined eligibility criteria; 146 ACL reconstructions were performed in an isolated manner (no-ALLR group) and 193 were combined with ALL (ALLR group). After matching, 130 patients were allocated to each group. The mean follow-up was 36.7 months. The overall graft failure rate was 4.6% (6.9% in the no-ALLR group and 2.3% in the ALLR group; P = .076). The adjusted Cox regression showed that graft failure rate was nonsignificantly different between the groups (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.096-1.364]; P = .133). Younger age (≤20 years) was associated with graft failure (adjusted HR, 0.29 [95% CI, 0.121-0.719]; P = .007).

Conclusion

Combined ACL and ALL reconstruction conditioned to intraoperative ultrasound-guided diagnosis of the ALL lesion has an equivalent ACL graft failure rate to isolated ACL. Intraoperative ultrasound diagnosis of an ALL injury may be an indication for the addition of an ALL reconstruction.

Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Augmentation of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Most Commonly Indicated for Pivot Shift of Grade 2 or Greater and for Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

PURPOSE

To determine the most common indications for lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) augmentation of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 2000 to the present (June 2022). Studies that met the following criteria were included: patients of any age who underwent LET in addition to ACLR, studies reporting at least 1 indication for LET, and observational/randomized controlled trial study designs including prevalence of indications. Publications had to be reported in English and peer reviewed and to have originated in the United States or countries offering identical protocols and procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 463 studies were identified from the initial search, 23 of which met inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Eight of the 23 studies (34.8%) used a modified Lemaire technique, seven (30.4%) used a MacIntosh modified by Arnold-Coker, and eight (34.8%) used other techniques to perform LET. A total of 2,125 patients (53% female, 47% male [3 studies did not report sex]) underwent ACLR augmented with LET. The indications along with prevalence were as follows: positive pivot shift test (grade ≥2) (19 of 23, 82.6%), revision ACLR (12 of 23, 52.2%), ligamentous laxity (11 of 23, 47.8%), general sports participation (11 of 23, 47.8%), age less than 25 years (8 of 23, 34.8%), high risk of graft failure (5 of 23, 21.7%), and positive Lachman test (4 of 23, 17.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Pivot shift grade ≥2 was the most common reason orthopaedic surgeons chose to add LET to ACLR, with revision ACLR, patient age <25, and general sports participation following closely behind.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

The presence of a deep lateral femoral notch sign in ACL-injured patients is associated with a 2.7° steeper posterior tibial slope and a 19% higher frequency of lateral meniscal injuries

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to study the relationship between the presence of a deep lateral femoral notch sign (DLFNS) in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-injured patients and a higher posterior lateral tibial slope (LPTS), a reduced meniscal bone angle (MBA), a higher LPTS/MBA ratio and a higher incidence of concomitant injuries in primary ACL tears.

METHODS

A retrospective case-control study was performed in patients submitted to primary ACL reconstruction with an available preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan. Patients with ACL tears and a femoral impactation with a depth ≥2 mm were assorted to the DLFNS group and patients with ACL tear and without a DLFNS to the control group. LPTS and MBA were measured in MRI. The presence of concomitant injuries (meniscal, posterior cruciate ligament, medial collateral ligament, lateral collateral ligament and bone injuries) was assessed in MRI. Quantitative data are presented in the median ± interquartile range (IQR).

RESULTS

There were 206 patients included in the study, with 46 patients assorted to the DLFNS group and 160 patients to the control group. In the DLFNS group, the median LPTS was 6.7° (IQR: 4.0-8.2) versus 4.0° in the control group (IQR: 2.2-6.5) (p = 0.003). The LPTS/MBA ratio was significantly higher in the DLFNS group, with a median of 0.32 (IQR: 0.19-0.44), in comparison to the control group, with a median of 0.19 (IQR: 0.11-0.31) (p < 0.001). The multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the LPTS is an independent risk factor to having a DLFNS (odds ratio [OR] = 1.161; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.042-1.293, p = 0.007). There was a higher incidence of concomitant lateral meniscal injuries in the DLFNS group (67% vs. 48%, p = 0.017).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ACL tears, the presence of a DLFNS is associated with a steeper lateral posterior tibial slope, as well as a higher incidence of concomitant lateral meniscal injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Recovery of Full Hyperextension After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Associated With Better Functional Outcomes but Greater Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Related Laxity After a Minimum 24-Month Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To evaluate patients who had anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with preoperative hyperextension and compare physical examination (KT-1000 and pivot shift) and patient-reported outcome measures of patients who recovered the entire hyperextension with patients who did not.

METHODS

Patients aged 18 to 60 years with more than 5° of knee hyperextension who had anatomic ACL reconstruction with any graft from June 2013 to June 2021 and at least a 24-month follow-up were evaluated retrospectively. Hamstrings and patellar tendon grafts were fixed around 20° to 30° of flexion and in full extension, respectively. Patients who could recover hyperextension were compared with patients who did not. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data, including physical examination and patient-reported outcome measures, were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 225 patients evaluated, 48 (21.3%) did not recover hyperextension, and 177 recovered full range of motion. Patients who did not recover hyperextension had a larger graft diameter (8.7 ± 0.7 mm [confidence interval, 8.502-8.898 mm] vs 8.3 ± 0.7 mm [confidence interval, 8.197-8.403 mm]; P = .018). Regarding the postoperative subjective variables, patients who recovered hyperextension showed improvement on all scales (International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm, Forgotten Joint Score, and Global Perceived Effect) evaluated compared with patients who did not recover the range of motion. Patients who recovered hyperextension also showed more laxity on physical examination, measured by the KT-1000 (1.8 ± 0.8 vs 1.1 ± 1.0; P = .0006) and the pivot shift (62.1% [grade 0] and 37.9% [grade 1] vs 79.2% [grade 0] and 20.8% [grade 1]; P = .027).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with knee hyperextension who regained range of motion after ACL reconstruction have worse knee laxity than patients who regained full extension but not hyperextension. However, patients who recover full range of motion showed higher scores on subjective function scales, including a greater number of patients who achieved patient acceptable symptom state for the International Knee Documentation Committee score.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Anatomic Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction with Iliotibial Band Graft and Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) attempts to restore native ACL function. Persistent anterolateral instability is a common symptom after ACLR that can lead to worse patient outcomes. Additional surgeries, like anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR), can augment the ACL graft and help increase anterolateral rotational stability. Certain indications for ACLR with ALLR include high-grade pivot shift, increased posterior tibial slope (>12°), revision ACLR, and concomitant ligamentous or meniscal injuries. We describe an anatomic ALLR technique using an 8 cm long × 1 cm wide strip of the inferior aspect of the iliotibial band fixed at the native attachment sites of the ALL.

Role of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis in Restraining Internal Tibial Rotation: In Vitro Biomechanical Assessment of Lateral Tissue Engagement

BACKGROUND

The way in which force increases in the anterolateral tissues and the lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) tissue to resist internal rotation (IR) of the tibia after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in isolation and after LET augmentation, respectively, is not well understood.

PURPOSE

(1) To compare in a cadaveric model how force increases (ie, engages) in the anterolateral tissues with IR of the tibia after isolated ACL reconstruction and in the LET tissue after augmentation of the ACL reconstruction with LET and (2) to determine whether IR of the tibia is related to engagement of the LET tissue.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

IR moments were applied to 9 human cadaveric knees at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion using a robotic manipulator. Each knee was tested in 2 states: (1) after isolated ACL reconstruction with intact anterolateral tissues and (2) after LET was performed using a modified Lemaire technique with the LET tissue fixed at 60° of flexion under 44 N of tension. Resultant forces carried by the anterolateral tissues and the LET tissue were determined via superposition. The way force increased in these tissues was characterized via parameters of tissue engagement, namely in situ slack, in situ stiffness, and tissue force at peak applied IR moment, and then compared (α < .05). IR was related to parameters of engagement of the LET tissue via simple linear regression (α < .05).

RESULTS

The LET tissue exhibited less in situ slack than the anterolateral tissues at 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion (P≤ .04) and greater in situ stiffness at 30° and 90° of flexion (P≤ .043). The LET tissue carried greater force at the peak applied IR moment at 0° and 30° of flexion (P≤ .01). IR was related to the in situ slack of the LET tissue (R2≥ 0.88; P≤ .0003).

CONCLUSION

LET increased restraint to IR of the tibia compared with the anterolateral tissue, particularly at 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion. IR of the tibia was positively associated with in situ slack of the LET tissue.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Fixing the LET at 60° of flexion still provided IR restraint in the more functionally relevant flexion angle of 30°. Surgeons should pay close attention to the angle of internal and/or external tibial rotation when fixing the LET tissue intraoperatively because this surgical parameter is related to in situ slack of the LET tissue and, therefore, the amount of IR of the tibia.

Arthroscopic-Assisted Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis With Knotless Anchor Fixation

Recent studies have reported the biomechanical and clinical advantages of lateral extraarticular augmentation procedures including the modified lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in the setting of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. LET has been shown to significantly decrease re-rupture rates in high-risk patients and decrease anterior cruciate ligament graft forces during pivoting loads and instrumented anterior laxity testing. Many variations of the modified LET approaches have been described. However, concerns including lateral hematoma, wound-healing complications, and increased operative time exist. This minimally invasive, arthroscopic-assisted approach using a knotless, all-suture anchor allows for direct visualization through a 2-cm incision and inherently decreases the morbidity associated with traditional LET techniques.

The Role of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Treatment of Rotatory Knee Instability: a Scoping Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The addition of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) has become increasingly popular to address residual rotatory knee instability. The purpose of this article is to review the anatomy and biomechanics of the anterolateral complex (ALC) of the knee, outline different LET techniques, and provide biomechanical and clinical evidence for its use as an augmentation procedure with ACLR.

RECENT FINDINGS

Rotatory knee instability has been identified as a common contributor to ACL rupture in both the primary and revision settings. Several biomechanical studies have shown that LET reduces strain on the ACL by decreasing excess tibial translation and rotation. Additionally, in vivo studies have demonstrated restoration of side-to-side differences in anterior-posterior knee translation, higher rates of return to play, and overall increased patient satisfaction following combined ACLR and LET. As a result, various LET techniques have been developed to help offload the ACL graft and lateral compartment of the knee. However, conclusions are limited by a lack of concrete indications and contraindications for use of LET in the clinical setting. Recent studies have shown that rotatory knee instability contributes to native ACL and ACL graft rupture and LET may provide further stability to reduce rates of failure. Further investigation is needed to establish concrete indications and contraindications to determine which patients would most benefit from added stability of the ALC.

Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis with Iliotibial Band Using Knotless All-Suture Anchor Femoral Fixation

Common injuries, such as anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears, can result in both anterior and rotational instability of the knee. An arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) method has been shown to be effective in restoring anterior translational stability, but this could be followed by persistent rotational instability by means of residual pivot shifts or repeat instability episodes. Alternative techniques, such as a lateral extraarticular tenodesis (LET), has been proposed as a technique for preventing persistent rotational instability following ACLR. This article presents a case of a LET using an autologous central slip of iliotibial (IT) band with fixation to the femur using a 1.8-mm knotless all-suture anchor.

Anatomical Landmark Technique for Femoral Tunnel Placement of Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis

The anterolateral ligament is a crucial part of the anterolateral complex of the knee, providing rotator stability to the knee and being a primary restraint to tibial internal rotation. Lateral extra-articular tenodesis added to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction can reduce pivot shift without sacrificing the range of motion or increasing the risk of osteoarthritis. A 7- to 8-cm longitudinal skin incision is made and a 9.5- to 10-cm × 1- cm wide iliotibial band graft is dissected, leaving the distal attachment intact. The free end is whip stitched. One of the most important steps during the procedure is the identification of the site of attachment of the iliotibial band graft. The leash of vessels, fat pad, lateral supracondylar ridge, and fibular collateral ligament serve as important landmarks. The tunnel is drilled from the lateral femoral cortex with a guide pin and reamer pointing 20 to 30° anteriorly and proximally while the arthroscope visualizes the femoral anterior cruciate ligament tunnel. The graft is routed under the fibular collateral ligament. The graft is fixed with a bioscrew while the knee is kept in 30° flexion and the tibia is kept in neutral rotation. We believe that lateral extra-articular tenodesis gives the anterior cruciate ligament graft a good chance for faster healing along with addressing anterolateral rotatory instability. Choosing a correct fixation point is very important to restore normal knee biomechanics.

Combined anterolateral complex and anterior cruciate ligament injury: Anatomy, biomechanics, and management-State-of-the-art

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture typically occurs because of sudden axial loading of the knee in conjunction with a coupled valgus and rotational moment about the tibia. However, the ACL is not the only structure damaged during this mechanism of injury, and studies have shown that the anterolateral complex (ALC) of the knee is also commonly involved. Biomechanical studies have established that the ALC plays an important role as a secondary stabiliser to control anterolateral rotatory laxity (ALRL). Indeed, it has been suggested that failure to address injury to the ALC at the time of ACL reconstruction (ACLR) may increase the risk of graft failure owing to persistent ALRL. The concept of combining a lateral extra-articular procedure to augment ACLR for the treatment of ACL injury emerged with a view to decrease the failure rate of either procedure in isolation. This state-of-the-art review discusses the history of the anatomy of the ALC, the biomechanics of a variety of lateral extra-articular augmentation procedures, and provides clinical guidelines for their use in primary ACLR.

Effect of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis on the Rate of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Elite Athletes

BACKGROUND

There is growing evidence that anterolateral procedures can reduce the risk of rerupture in high-risk recreational athletes undergoing primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR). However, this effectiveness has never been evaluated in elite athletes.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in reducing revision rates in primary ACLR in elite athletes. Additionally, this study evaluated whether LET had a greater effect when combined with ACLR utilizing a hamstring or patellar tendon graft.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A consecutive cohort of elite athletes with an isolated ACL tear undergoing autograft patellar or hamstring tendon reconstruction with or without Lemaire LET were analyzed between 2005 and 2018. A minimum 2-year follow-up was required. The association between the use of LET and ACL graft failure as defined by revision ACLR was evaluated with univariate and multivariate logistic regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 455 elite athletes (83% men and overall age 22.5 ± 4.7 years) underwent primary ACLR with (n = 117) or without (n = 338) a LET procedure. Overall, 36 athletes (7.9%) experienced ACL graft failure, including 32 (9.5%) reconstructions without a LET and 4 (3.4%) with a LET. Utilization of LET during primary ACLR reduced the risk of graft failure by 2.8 times, with 16.5 athletes needing LET to prevent a single ACL graft failure. Multivariate models showed that LET significantly reduced the risk of graft rupture (relative risk = 0.325; P = .029) as compared with ACLR alone after controlling for sex and age at ACLR. Including graft type in the model did not significantly change the risk profile, and although a patellar tendon graft had a slightly lower risk of failure, this was not statistically significant (P = .466).

CONCLUSION

The addition of LET reduced the risk of undergoing revision by 2.8 times in elite athletes undergoing primary ACLR. This risk reduction did not differ significantly between the patellar tendon and hamstring tendon autografts. With these results, status as an elite athlete should be included in the indications for a LET, as they are at increased risk for ACL graft failure.

Modified iliotibial band tenodesis versus lateral extracapsular tenodesis, to augment anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a 2-year randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Residual instability following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is associated with disruption of the anterolateral complex (ALC). Our goal was to conduct a randomized controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of modified Iliotibial tenodesis (MITBT) versus lateral extracapsular tenodesis (LET) to correct this residual instability.

METHODS

Group 1 underwent MITBT, Group 2 LET, added to the ACL reconstruction. Outcomes of interest were Tegner activity Scores (TAS), international knee documentation committee score (IKDC), knee osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), ACL related quality of life (ACL QoL), recurrent ACL rupture and meniscal tears. Follow-up was 2 years. Statistical analysis used chi-squared tests, frequency statistics and generalized linear models. We have followed the guidelines outlined in the CONSORT statement.

RESULTS

A total of 164 patients were randomized, 84 to Group 1, 80 to Group 2. Group 1 had higher TAS than Group 2, at 2 years (median 8, range 7-10 vs. median 7, range 5-9, P<0.001). Group 1 had higher ACL QoL scores at 1 and 2 years post-surgery (82.1, SD2.7 vs. 67.9, SD 4.0, P< 0.001 and 82.5, SD 2.6 vs. 68.8, SD 3.8, P<0.001, respectively), and higher KOOS Sport/recreation subscale at both 1 and 2 years (91.5, SD4.3 vs. 78.3, SD7.9, P<0.001 and 91.8, SD4.8 vs. 80.4, SD 9.5, P<0.001). Risk of recurrent ACL rupture (0% vs. 5%, P = 0.040-0.05) and medial meniscal tear (2.4% vs. 14%, P = 0.007-0.02) were lower in Group 1.

CONCLUSION

Augmentation of ACL reconstruction with the MITBT, rather than the LET, was associated with improved outcomes, and lower risks of recurrent ACL rupture and medial meniscal tears.