Clinical Outcomes of Isolated Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction or in Combination With Anatomic Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction

Considerations for revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A review of the current literature

Background

Failure rates among primary Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction range from 3.2 to 11.1 %. Recently, there has been increased focus on surgical and anatomic considerations which predispose patients to failure, including excessive posterior tibial slope (PTS), unaddressed high-grade pivot shift, and improper tunnel placement.

Methods

The purpose of this review was to provide a current summary and analysis of the literature regarding patient-related and technical factors surrounding revision ACLR, rehabilitation considerations, overall outcomes, and return to sport (RTS) for patients who undergo revision ACLR.

Results

In revision ACLR patients, those receiving autografts are 2.78 times less likely to experience a re-rupture compared to patients who receive allografts. Additionally, individuals with properly positioned tunnels and removable implants are considered strong candidates for one-stage revision procedures. Conversely, cases involving primary tunnel widening of approximately 15 mm are typically indicative of two-stage revision ACLR. These findings underscore the importance of graft selection and surgical approach in optimizing outcomes for patients undergoing revision ACLR.

Conclusion

Given the high rates of revision surgery in young, active patients who return to pivoting sports, the literature recommends strong consideration of a combined ACLR + anterolateral ligament (ALL) or lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) procedure in this population. Unrecognized posterolateral corner (PLC) injury is a common cause of ACLR failure and current literature suggests concurrent operative management of high-grade PLC injuries. Excessive PTS has been identified as an independent risk factor for ACL graft failure. Consider revision ACLR with combined slope-reducing tibial osteotomy in cases of posterior tibial slope greater than 12°.

Combined Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Results in Better Knee Stability and More Satisfactory Subjective Outcomes in Non-Athlete Patients Undergoing Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Background: Consensus has not yet been reached regarding combined anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ALLR) with revisional anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (RACLR). We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between patients who underwent isolated RACLR and those who underwent RACLR combined with ALLR. Methods: Between June 2010 and June 2021, 49 patients who underwent RACLR were retrospectively reviewed over a 24-month follow-up. Patients were categorized into the isolated RACLR (n = 37, group 1) or combined ALLR group (n = 12, group 2). Clinical outcomes were evaluated with several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for each PROM. The side-to-side difference (SSD) of the anterior instability was measured. The pivot-shift test was performed. Results: Baseline characteristics showed no differences between the groups. PROMs showed no significant differences between the groups at the 2-year follow-up. Group 2 was superior to group 1 in the MCID achievement rate for Lysholm knee and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective scores at 24 months postoperatively. At the final follow-up, the proportion of IKDC grade A in SSD for anterior laxity was higher in group 2 than in group 1 (58.3% versus [vs.] 18.3%, p = 0.009), and the proportion of pivot-shift grade 0 was also higher in group 2 (66.7% vs. 27.0%, p = 0.013). The "near return to activity" rate was also higher in group 2 than in group 1 (83.3% vs. 45.9%, p = 0.043). Conclusions: Combining ALLR with RACLR in non-athletes results in a higher proportion of patients with less mechanical graft failure and satisfactory clinical outcomes.

Dynamic radiostereometry can objectively quantify the kinematic laxity patterns and rotation instability of the knee during a pivot-shift test

PURPOSE

The pivot-shift test is used to clinically assess knee instability in patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) lesions; however, it has low interobserver reliability. Dynamic radiostereometry (dRSA) is a highly precise and noninvasive method for the objective evaluation of joint kinematics. The purpose of this study was to quantify precise knee kinematics during a pivot-shift test using dRSA imaging.

METHOD

Eight human donor legs, including hemipelvises, were evaluated. Arthroscopic intervention was performed inducing ligament lesions in the ACL, and anterolateral ligament (ALL) section was performed as a capsular incision. The pivot-shift test was recorded with dRSA on knees with intact ligaments, ACL-deficient and ACL + ALL-deficient knees.

RESULTS

A pivot-shift pattern was identifiable after ligament lesion, as a change in tibial posterior drawer velocity from 7.8 mm/s (95% CI: 3.7; 11.9) in ligament intact knees to 30.4 mm/s (95% CI 23.0; 38.8) after ACL lesion to 35.1 mm/s (95% CI 23.4; 46.7) after combined ACL-ALL lesion. The anterior-posterior drawer excursion increased from 2.8 mm (95% CI 2.1; 3.4) in ligament intact knees to 7.2 mm (95% CI 5.5; 8.9) after ACL lesion to 7.6 mm (95% CI 5.5; 9.8) after combined lesion. A statistically significant increase in tibial external rotation towards the end of the pivot-shift motion was observed when progressing from intact to ACL + ALL-deficient knees (p < 0.023).

CONCLUSION

This experimental study demonstrates the feasibility of dRSA to objectively quantify the kinematic laxity patterns of the knee during the pivot-shift test. The dynamic parameters obtained through dRSA revealed the kinematic changes from ACL to combined ACL-ALL ligament lesion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Not applicable.

Clinical Outcomes of Single-Stage Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using a Fast-Setting Bone Graft Substitute

Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) can be achieved in a single-stage or two-stage approach. Single-stage revisions have several advantages, including one less operation, decreased cost, and a quicker recovery for patients. Revision ACLR can be complicated by malpositioned or dilated bone tunnels, which makes a single-stage revision more challenging or sometimes necessitates a two-stage approach. The use of fast-setting bone graft substitutes (BGS) has been described in recent literature as a strategy to potentially help address this problem in the setting of single-stage revision ACLR. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient-reported clinical outcomes of patients who have undergone single-stage revision ACLR using fast-setting BGS to address prior malpositioned or dilated tunnels. A retrospective review was conducted of the first nine consecutive patients who had undergone single-stage revision ACLR using a fast-setting BGS by a single surgeon between May 2017 and February 2020 with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Patient-reported clinical outcomes, including the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) questionnaire, the Tegner Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, patient satisfaction questions, and the need for additional surgery were evaluated for this group between 26 and 49 months postoperative. Of the nine patients eligible for inclusion, eight patients (88.9%) were evaluated, and one was lost to follow-up. At an average follow-up of 37.9 months (range: 27.8-55.7), the mean postoperative IKDC score was 75.0 ± 11.3, and the mean postoperative Tegner Lysholm Knee Score was 83.0 ± 17.6. None of the patients required additional revision surgery or experienced construct failure at the time of follow-up. Seven of eight respondents (87.5%) had their preoperative expectations met with the surgery, and 100% of patients stated they would have the surgery again. Single-stage revision ACLR using fast-setting BGS showed overall positive clinical outcomes for this pilot group of patients at a minimum 2-year follow-up. In select revision scenarios, these materials may be a valuable option to allow the filling of defects without compromising fixation or clinical outcomes.

Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Patients with Associated Anterolateral Ligament Injury

Objective  To evaluate if there is a significant difference in the outcomes of isolated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in patients with or without associated anterolateral ligament (ALL) injury. Methods  We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study through the analysis of medical records and the application of the questionnaires of the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form to patients undergoing isolated ACL reconstruction. Results  The 52 participants included were divided into two groups: 19 with associated ALL injury and 33 with no associated ALL injury. None of the patients with associated ALL injury suffered an ACL rerupture, and 21.1% presented injuries to other knee structures after surgery. Among the patients with no associated injury, 6.1% suffered ACL rerupture, and 18.2% presented injuries to other structures after surgery ( p  = 0.544). Return to activities at the same level as that of the preoperative period occurred in 60% of the patients with associated ALL injury and in 72% of those with no associated injury ( p  = 0.309). The mean score on the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale was of 81.6 points in patients with associated ALL injury, and of 90.1 in those with no associated injury ( p  = 0.032). The mean score on the IKDC Subjective Knee Form was of 70.3 points in patients with associated ALL injury and of 76.7 in those with no associated injury ( p  = 0.112). Conclusion  There was no statistically significant difference regarding graft injuries or new injuries to other structures, satisfaction with the operated knee, or the score on the IKDC Subjective Knee Form. Return to activity was similar in the groups with and without associated ALL injuries. The scores on the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale were better, with a statistically significant difference in the group with no associated ALL injuries.

An anteromedial stabilization procedure has the most protective effect on the anterior cruciate ligament in tibial external rotation. A human knee model study

INTRODUCTION

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains associated with the risk of re-rupture and persisting rotational instability. Additional extraarticular anterolateral stabilization procedures stabilize the tibial internal rotation and lead to lower ACL failure rate and improved knee stability. However, data for additional stabilization of tibial external rotation is lacking and the importance of an anteromedial stabilization procedure is less well evaluated. Aim of this study is to investigate the influence of an extraarticular anteromedial stabilization procedure for the stabilization of the tibial external rotation and protection of the ACL from these rotational forces.

METHODS

Internal and external rotations of the tibia were applied to a finite element (FE) model with anatomical ACL, posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), lateral collateral ligament (LCL), medial collateral ligament (MCL) and intact medial and lateral meniscus. Five additional anatomic structures (Anteromedial stabilization/anteromedial ligament, AML, augmented superficial medial collateral ligament, sMCL, posterior oblique ligament, POL, anterolateral ligament, ALL, and popliteal tendon, PLT) were added to the FE model separately and then combined. The force histories within all structures were measured and determined for each case.

RESULTS

The anteromedial stabilization or imaginary AML was the main secondary stabilizer of tibial external rotation (90% of overall ACL force reduction). The AML reduced the load on the ACL by 9% in tibial external rotation which could not be achieved by an augmented sMCL (-1%). The AML had no influence in tibial internal rotation (-1%). In the combined measurements with all additional structures (AML, ALL, PLT, POL) the load on the ACL was reduced by 10% in tibial external rotation.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that an additional anteromedial stabilization procedure secures the tibial external rotation and has the most protective effect on the ACL during these external rotational forces.

Editorial Commentary: Knee Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Procedures: Appropriate Study Design Is Essential for Reducing Conflicting Findings and Unnecessary Controversy in the Orthopaedic Literature

Knee lateral extra-articular tenodesis procedures (LEAPs) reduce graft rupture rates when performed at the time of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, in the setting of revision ACL reconstruction, LEAPs are less studied and remain controversial. Many studies support combined procedures (ACL + LEAP), yet others do not. When the literature comprises small patient cohorts and short follow-up periods, conflicting results often arise. The controversy surrounding them may be unnecessarily generated by the publication of low-quality studies. Future studies should focus on adequate power; appropriate design and methodology, including matching or randomization to account for potential confounding factors; proper statistical analyses; and avoidance of spin bias.

Impacts of Segond Fractures on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Segond fractures, characterized by avulsion injuries at the lateral tibial condyle's anterolateral structure (ALS) attachment, often coincide with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries, potentially leading to knee instability. However, the influence of Segond fractures on knee stability after ACL reconstruction remains uncertain. Despite documented ALS reconstructions, there is a lack of consensus regarding the assessment of ALS failure and the criteria for surgical interventions. This study aimed to determine if Segond fracture presence impacts ACL reconstruction outcomes, utilizing patient-reported subjective assessments and healthcare providers' objective evaluations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study encompassed 639 patients (328 males, 311 females; mean age 26.9 years) who underwent ACL reconstruction, with a follow-up of at least one year. Subjects were divided into two groups: Segond fractures diagnosed through radiographic findings (Group S+, n = 17) and no Segond fractures (Group S-, n = 622). Clinical evaluation included the 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36), Lysholm score, visual analog scale (VAS) for knee pain, knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), and knee instability assessment via Telos SE (Telos Japan, Tokyo, Japan). Statistical comparisons were performed between the two groups.

RESULTS

At the final follow-up, all SF-36 subscales improved in all eight subscales compared to before surgery, reaching national standard scores; no significant inter-group differences were evident. Lysholm scores were 93.0 ± 12.1 (Group S+) and 91.7 ± 10.9 (Group S-) (P = 0.62), VAS for knee pain was 10.0 ± 18.0 (Group S+) and 11.9 ± 16.9 (Group S-) (P = 0.62), total KOOS was 89.0 ± 17.4 (Group S+) and 90.7 ± 9.9 (Group S-) (P = 0.39), and anterior tibial translation differences were 2.8 ± 3.0 mm (Group S+) and 2.7 ± 2.9 mm (Group S-) (P = 0.73). All these values represent postoperative measurements. No significant discrepancies existed between groups across evaluation methods.

CONCLUSIONS

This study's results suggest that Segond fractures have minimal impact on clinical ACL reconstruction outcomes, as assessed through both patient-reported subjective evaluations and objective healthcare provider evaluations. Segond fractures' significance in postoperative outcomes questions the necessity of ALS reconstruction.

A Lateral Extra-articular Procedure Reduces the Failure Rate of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Surgery Without Increasing Complications: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lateral extra-articular procedures are becoming increasingly popular in association with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, especially in patients with persistent rotatory instability and in a high-risk population. However, few studies have investigated the outcomes of the lateral extra-articular procedure as an associated procedure in an ACL revision (R-ACLR) setting and its benefit with respect to isolated intra-articular reconstruction.

HYPOTHESIS

Lateral extra-articular procedures reduce the failure rate of revision ACL reconstruction (R-ACLR).

PURPOSE

To compare subjective outcomes, knee stability, and failure and complication rates between patients who underwent ACL revision with and without an associated lateral extra-articular procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed, Cochrane, and OVID databases was performed on September 2022 in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Eligible studies were trials directly comparing patients who had isolated ACL revision with patients who had ACL revision associated with lateral extra-articular procedures at a minimum follow-up of 2 years. A meta-analysis was performed, and bias and the quality of the evidence were rated according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included: a total of 334 patients were treated with isolated revision (isolated (R-ACLR)) and 342 treated with combined revision and a lateral extra-articular procedure (combined (R-ACLR)). For the failure rate, the meta-analysis showed a significantly decreased relative risk reduction of 54% (P = .004) in patients with combined (R-ACLR) with respect to isolated R-ACL, whereas no difference in complication rate was observed. The combined (R-ACLR) group demonstrated a decreased risk ratio of 50% (P = .002) for having a positive pivot-shift test result and a relative risk reduction of 68% (P = .003) for having a grade 2-3 pivot shift when compared with the isolated (R-ACLR) group. Finally, no significant differences were observed among the lateral extra-articular procedures.

CONCLUSION

The addition of a lateral extra-articular procedure to revision ACL significantly reduced the failure rate and postoperative pivot shift without increasing the complication rate. Anterolateral ligament reconstruction and a lateral extra-articular procedure with iliotibial band were effective in improving the outcomes of revision ACL reconstruction. Further high-level studies could help to clarify which subgroup of patients could particularly benefit from an anterolateral procedure in the context of ACL revision.

Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Does Not Decrease Graft Failure in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction When Combined With Quadriceps or Patellar Tendon Grafts

PURPOSE

To compare return-to-sport (RTS) rates, graft failure rates, and clinical outcomes in patients who underwent revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (R-ACLR) with additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) versus isolated R-ACLR.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the medical records of patients who underwent R-ACLR with or without a modified Lemaire LET procedure was performed. Seventy-four patients with at least 2 years of follow-up who had high-grade positive pivot-shift test findings were included. Concomitant procedures such as meniscectomy and meniscal repair were collected, along with any complications and/or graft failure. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form score were collected. The ability to RTS was defined as fully, partially, or not returned.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 39 underwent isolated R-ACLR (mean age ± standard deviation, 29.2 ± 12.2 years) whereas 35 underwent an additional LET procedure (mean age, 24.6 ± 7.4 years). The mean length of follow-up in the R-ACLR group was 56.6 ± 26.5 months compared with 44.3 ± 17.6 months in the R-ACLR-LET group (P = .02) (range, 24-120 months). Patient-reported outcome measures were higher in the R-ACLR-LET group, with the KOOS Activities of Daily Living (93.5 ± 2.0 vs 97.2 ± 1.6, P = .03) and KOOS Sport (63.0 ± 3.6 vs 74.3 ± 3.8, P = .05) subdomain scores reaching the level of statistical significance. No differences were found in the other KOOS subdomain scores or the International Knee Documentation Committee scores. Failure rates were not significantly different between the groups (12.8% for R-ACLR vs 11.4% for R-ACLR-LET, P = .99). There were 13 patients (72.2%) in the R-ACLR group and 14 patients (60.8%) in the R-ACLR-LET group who did not RTS.

CONCLUSIONS

R-ACLR with additional LET showed similar failure and RTS rates to isolated R-ACLR after failed ACLR. The R-ACLR-LET group showed better functional results with significantly higher KOOS subdomain scores for activities of daily living, as well as sports and recreation. However, this study was unable to recommend the modified Lemaire LET procedure to be routinely used in R-ACLR patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Knee Flexion Angle of Fixation During Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction or Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Lateral Extra-articular Reinforcement Techniques Performed in Conjunction With ACL Reconstruction

Background

Anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) or lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) is being used more frequently in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). However, the knee flexion angle at which fixation of ALLR or LET is performed during the procedure is quite variable based on existing technique descriptions.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to identify whether flexion angle at the time of ALLR/LET fixation affected postoperative outcomes in a clinical population. It was hypothesized that ALLR/LET fixation at low versus high flexion angles would lead to no statistically significant differences in patient-reported outcome measures and graft failure rates.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to identify published clinical studies of ACLR with ALLR/LET in which the knee flexion angle at the time of ALLR/LET was reported. A priori, low flexion was defined as 0° to 30°, and high flexion was defined as 60° to 90°. Studies were excluded if the flexion angle was between 31° and 59° because these angles constituted neither low nor high flexion angles and including them in an analysis of high versus low flexion angle at fixation would have biased the study results toward the null. The overall risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The pooled results of the studies were analyzed using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm, and Tegner scores, along with reported graft failure rates.

Results

A total of 32 clinical studies (5230 patients) met inclusion criteria: 22 studies (1999 patients) in the low-flexion group and 10 studies (3231 patients) in the high-flexion group. The median Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score was 6. Comparisons of patients with a low flexion angle versus a high flexion angle demonstrated no differences in the IKDC (P = .84), Lysholm (P = .67), or Tegner (P = .44) scores or in graft failure (3.4% vs 4.1%, respectively; P = .69).

Conclusion

The results of this review indicated that ACLR performed in conjunction with ALLR/LET provides good to excellent patient-reported outcomes and low graft failure rates when ALLR/LET fixation is performed in either low or high knee flexion.

The Role of Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction or Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis for Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Comparative Clinical Studies

BACKGROUND

After its success in restoring rotational stability and reducing failure rates in primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) or anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) has been endorsed for use in revision ACLR surgery, where failure rates are historically higher.

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on whether the addition of a LET or ALLR results in superior clinical outcomes and stability compared with isolated revision ACLR (iACLR).

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

The Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, PubMed, Medline, and Embase were used to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) criteria with the following search terms: ("extra-articular" OR "tenodesis" OR "anterolateral ligament" OR "iliotibial") AND ("anterior cruciate ligament") AND ("revision" OR "re-operation"). Data pertaining to all patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), rotational stability, and postoperative complications were extracted from each study.

RESULTS

After abstract and full-text screening, 10 clinical comparative studies were included. There were 793 patients, of whom 390 had an iACLR while 403 had an ACLR augmented with a LET or an ALLR (augmented ACLR [aACLR]). The mean time for assessment of PROMs was 35 months. The aACLR group had superior International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.27; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.54; P = .04), rotational stability (odds ratio [OR], 2.77; 95% CI, 1.91 to 4.01; P < .00001), and lower side-to-side difference (OR, -0.53; 95% CI, -0.81 to -0.24; P = .0003) than those without the augmentation. Furthermore, they were less likely to fail (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.80; P = .007). Subgroup analysis in the higher-grade laxity cohort (grade ≥2) revealed an even greater IKDC score (SMD, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.86; P = .005) and an improved Lysholm score (SMD, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.67; P < .0001) in the aACLR group.

CONCLUSION

Revision aACLR with a LET or an ALLR can improve subjective IKDC scores, restore rotational stability, and reduce failure rates compared with iACLR. Although controversy remains on the necessity of augmenting all revision ACLRs, the present meta-analysis advocates adding a lateral procedure, particularly in those with a higher-grade pivot shift.

Anterolateral knee complex considerations in contemporary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review

The anterolateral ligament (ALL) was first described in 1879 in the context of Segond fractures, which correlate with a 75-100% chance of an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear or a 66-75% chance of a meniscal tear. The purpose of this paper is to provide an updated comprehensive review on the anterolateral ligament complex of the knee focusing on the: (1) anatomy of the ALL/ALC; (2) associated biomechanics/function; and (3) important surgical considerations in contemporary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A systematic review of studies on ALL was conducted on Pubmed/MEDLINE and Cochrane databases (May 7th, 2020 to February 1st, 2022), with 20 studies meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were anatomical/biomechanical studies assessing ALL function, cadaveric and computer simulations, and comparative studies on surgical outcomes of ALLR (concomitant with ACL reconstruction). Eight studies were included and graded by MINOR and Newcastle-Ottawa scale to identify potential biases. The anatomy of the ALL is part of the anterolateral ligament complex (ALC), which includes the superficial/deep iliotibial band (including the Kaplan fiber system), iliopatellar band, ALL, and anterolateral capsule. Multiple biomechanical studies have characterized the ALC as a secondary passive stabilizer in resisting tibial internal rotation. Given the role of the ALC in resisting internal tibial rotation, lateral extra-articular procedures including ALL augmentation may be considered for chronic ACL tears, ACL revisions, and a high-grade pivot shift test. In the context of TKA, in the event of injury to the ALC, a more constrained implant or soft-tissue reconstruction may be necessary to restore appropriate knee stability.

Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Decreases Passive Anterior Tibial Subluxation Compared With Isolated Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Despite Similar Rotational Stability and Clinical Outcomes

PURPOSE

To analyze the effect of augmenting a hamstring autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with an anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) on a primary outcome of passive anterior tibial subluxation (PATS) and a secondary outcome of the clinical outcomes.

METHODS

ACL-injured patients who underwent primary ACLR between March 2014 and February 2020 at our center were enrolled. Patients who underwent combined procedures (ACLR + ALLR) were matched in a 1:1 propensity ratio to patients who underwent ACLR only. We evaluated PATS, knee stability (side-to-side laxity difference, pivot-shift test), and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after the procedure and documented complications.

RESULTS

From an initial cohort of 252 patients with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years (48.4 ± 16.6 months), 35 matched pairs were included, and 17 patients (48.6%) in each group underwent second-look arthroscopy. The combined ACLR + ALLR group showed significantly better improvement of PATS in the lateral compartments than the isolated ACLR group (P = .034). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding knee stability (side-to-side laxity difference, pivot-shift test), PROMs, complications, and second-look arthroscopic findings (all P > .05). Moreover, the proportions of patients who achieved the minimal clinically important difference in PROMs were not different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined ACLR + ALLR procedure was associated with a mean improvement in anterior tibial subluxation for the lateral compartment that was 1.2 mm better than an isolated ACLR procedure, despite its lack of clinical significance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, cohort study.

Combined anterior cruciate ligament revision with reconstruction of the antero-lateral ligament does not improve outcome at 2-year follow-up compared to isolated acl revision; a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

It is essential to obtain rotational stability of the knee after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) and it is suggested that a supplementary reconstruction of the antero-lateral ligament (ALL-R) may supports this. Theoretically, ALL-R may be particularly advantageous to support revision of failed ACL-Rs. It was hypothesized that ACL revision combined with ALL-R will result in superior outcome compared to isolated ACL revision.

METHODS

The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial. Patients eligible for first time ACL revision were randomized to either isolated ACL revision (- ALL group) or ACL revision combined with a single-stranded allograft ALL-reconstruction (+ ALL group). Patient reported outcomes and function were evaluated at two-year follow-up by KNEES-ACL, KOOS, and Tegner activity scale. Objective knee laxity was evaluated at one-year follow-up using an instrumented Rolimeter test, the pivot shift test, and a manual Lachman test.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients were enrolled with 49 patients randomized to the + ALL group and 54 patients in the - ALL group. There were no differences at baseline between groups regarding age, gender, body mass index, preoperative patient reported outcome scores and concomitant meniscus or cartilage injury. The ACL revision was performed with an allograft in 10 patients (20%) in the + ALL group and 8 patients (15%) in the -ALL group. At follow-up there was no significant difference between the groups in patient reported outcome scores and clinical knee laxity.

CONCLUSION

Supplementary ALL-R does not improve subjective outcome of first time ACL revision at two-years and clinical knee stability at one-year follow-up compared to isolated ACL revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Comparison Between Continuous and Separate Grafts for ALL Reconstruction When Combined With ACL Reconstruction: A Retrospective Cohort Study From the SANTI Study Group

BACKGROUND

While various techniques have been described to augment the anterolateral side of the knee, such as lateral extra-articular tenodesis and anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction (ALLR), it is unclear how they affect clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare the results of 2 ALLR techniques for combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)/ALL reconstruction.

HYPOTHESIS

The graft rupture rate, complications, and patient-reported outcomes are similar between a reconstruction technique using a continuous gracilis graft (CG) and single femoral tunnel for ACL/ALL reconstruction, and one using a separate gracilis graft (SG) and independent femoral tunnels.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of data collected prospectively at 2 hospitals was conducted: one in which a CG is preferred when performing combined ACL/ALL reconstruction and the other in which an SG is preferred. The medical records at these 2 hospitals were searched to identify ACL-deficient patients who had undergone ACL/ALL reconstruction between 2015 and 2020. Eligible patients were between 18 and 60 years of age, had the reconstruction surgery done within 24 months of the injury, and had ≥2 years of follow-up. The eligible patients were contacted to gather outcomes, or their outcomes were collected in person during their last follow-up visit. Outcomes evaluated included graft rupture rate, complication rate, and Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF) scores. Preoperative and intraoperative data were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 237 patients were available for analysis in the GC group and 178 in the SG group with a mean follow-up of 3 years (CG: SD, 9.6 months; SG: SD, 8.1 months). The authors found a low rate of graft rupture (CG: 3.4%; SG: 2.8%; P = .785) and no difference between techniques. The complication rate was 6% in the CG group, while it was 10% in the SG group (P = .112). The mean value of the IKDC-SKF was similar between techniques (CG: 88.1; SG: 87.9; P = .267), and the mean Lysholm score was excellent in both sets of patients (CG: 90.0; SG: 92.4; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This study found little to no difference in the graft rupture rate, complication rate, and functional knee scores when using a CG or SG for ALLR during combined ACL/ALL reconstruction. Both techniques are equivalent and can be used for an anterolateral augmentation procedure in combination with ACL reconstruction.

Comparison of ACL and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction With Isolated ACL Reconstruction Using Hamstring Autograft: Outcomes in Young Female Patients With High-Grade Pivot Shift

Background

Inferior return to sports (RTS) and functional outcomes have been reported in women after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose was to evaluate the results of combined ACLR and anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) in young women with a high-grade pivot shift (grade ≥2). It was hypothesized that combined ACLR and ALLR would result in better RTS and rotational stability than isolated ACLR.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Two groups were retrospectively evaluated and compared. Group I (n = 39; mean age, 31.1 ± 5.7 years) underwent isolated ACLR using hamstring autografts; group C (n = 39; mean age, 30.4 ± 6.1 years) underwent combined ACLR and ALLR. Subjective outcome measures included the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective form, Lysholm, Tegner, and ACL-Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI). Objective tests included a KT-2000 arthrometer stress test, a pivot-shift test, an isokinetic strength test, a Y-balance test, and a single-leg hop test. A postoperative questionnaire was administered to determine the rates and types of RTS, quality of sports performance, and reinjury and satisfaction rates. Subjective scores and clinical tests were performed at 2 years. Magnetic resonance imaging and second-look arthroscopy were conducted during the 1- and 2-year follow-ups, respectively.

Results

The mean follow-up for groups I and C were 30.4 ± 3.9 and 29.3 ± 3.5 months, respectively (P = .194). Patients in group C had better anteroposterior (P = .001) and rotational (P = .005) stability and higher ACL-RSI scores (P = .025) than those in group I. Group C had higher composite and posteromedial reach scores on the Y-balance test than group I (P = .014 and P = .010, respectively). A total of 26 (66.7%) patients in group C and 17 (43.6%) in group I returned to their prior level of sports (P = .040). Rerupture of the ACL graft and contralateral ACL rupture occurred in 2 (5.1%) and 2 (5.1%) patients in group I, respectively, compared with no rerupture or contralateral ACL rupture in group C.

Conclusion

Combined ACLR and ALLR in young women with a high-grade pivot shift was associated with better knee stability parameters, dynamic postural stability, and psychological readiness to RTS than isolated ACLR.

Additional Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Helps Patients Improve Dynamic Postural Stability in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Background and Objectives: The goal in treating anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury especially in revision cases is return to sports activity by regaining dynamic postural stability. Among various methods to achieve this goal, additional anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) is gaining attention. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of additional ALLR in revision ACL reconstruction (RACLR). Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent RACLR between July 2015 and June 2018 were enrolled. The exclusion criteria were less than 1-year follow-up, age older than 45 years, concomitant multiple ligament injuries, contralateral knee injury, subtotal or total meniscectomized state, and articular cartilage lesions worse than Outerbridge grade 3. Thirty-nine patients (20 patients; RACLR only (Group A), 19 patients; RACLR with additional ALLR (Group B)) were included. Clinical scores (Lysholm score, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Tegner activity scale), isokinetic strength test, single-leg-hop for distance test (SLHDT), Y-balance test (YBT) were checked preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. Results: Limb symmetry index values in YBT showed significantly better result in Group B 1-year postoperatively (Group A: 97.2 ± 4.0, Group B: 100.3 ± 2.9, p = 0.010), although there were no differences preoperatively between groups (Group A: 90.4 ± 6.7, Group B: 89.3 ± 5.5, p = 0.594). Regarding clinical scores, isokinetic strength tests, and SLHDT, there were no differences between groups preoperatively nor 1-year postoperatively. Conclusions: Additional ALLR in RACLR helped patients gain better dynamic postural stability at 1-year postoperative follow-up.

Sectioning of the Anterolateral Ligaments in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Sectioned Knees Increases Internal Rotation of the Knee Joint: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Cadaveric Studies

PURPOSE

To investigate whether anterolateral ligament (ALL) sectioning (sALL) in the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-sectioned (sACL) knee increases the anterior tibial translation (ATT) or internal rotation (IR) of the knee from previous cadaveric biomechanical studies.

METHODS

Multiple comprehensive literature databases, including PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and Cochrane Library, were searched for studies evaluating the in vitro biomechanical function of ALL. This meta-analysis compared the increased ATT and IR between the sACL and sACL + sALL knees at 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion. Thresholds of 2 mm for the difference in ATT and 2° for the difference in IR were considered to be clinically significant.

RESULTS

Thirteen cadaveric biomechanical studies were included. All 13 studies satisfied the threshold for a satisfactory methodological quality (Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies score >75%). At 30° of knee flexion, the meta-analysis showed a greater increase in ATT in the sACL + sALL knees than in the sACL knees by 1.23 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-1.84; P < .0001). However, the mean difference was less than the minimal clinically significant difference (<2 mm). The meta-analysis also showed a greater increase in IR in the sACL + sALL knees than in the sACL knees at 30° (mean difference [MD]: 2.24°; 95% CI: 1.39-3.09; P < .00001), 60° (MD: 2.77°; 95% CI: 1.88-3.67; P < .00001), and 90° (MD: 2.29°; 95% CI: 1.42-3.15; P < .00001) of knee flexion. The differences in IR at 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion were clinically relevant (>2°).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the different experimental setups and protocols between studies, the meta-analysis of biomechanical cadaveric studies showed that sectioning of the ALL in sACL knees increased IR at 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that ALL contributes to IR in ACL-deficient knees at 30°, 60°, and 90° of flexion.

Clinical outcomes and return to sport after single-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by bone-patellar tendon autograft combined with lateral extra-articular tenodesis

PURPOSE

The anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) failure rate continues to increase. Involvement of a young population with a desire to return to sport, explains the increased need for ACLR (revACLR) revision. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcome, complications, failure rate and return to sport of a single-stage revACLR using bone patellar tendon-bone (BTBT) combined with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 36 patients who underwent revACLR. Knee stability was assessed by Lachman and Pivot shift test. Objective anterior laxity was determined by KT-2000 arthrometer. The IKDC subjective, Lysholm, ACL-RSI Scores, level of sport activity and Forgotten Joint Score-12 were recorded.

RESULTS

Of 36 patients, we collected data from 17 who underwent single-stage revACLR with autologous BTBT combined with LET, performed using an extra-articular MacIntosh procedure as modified by Arnold-Coker. The side-to-side difference in Lachman test and Pivot shift test significantly improved postoperatively. The subjective IKDC, Lysholm and ACL-RSI significantly improved from 71.4 ± 9.03 to 92 ± 6.9, from 58.3 ± 19.3 to 66.8 ± 27.7 and from 50.4 ± 12.2 to 68.6 ± 24.5, respectively during the post-operative follow-up. Ten patients (58.8%) returned to their desired level of sport. One patient was considered a failure because of the postoperative laxity.

CONCLUSION

Single-stage revACLR with BPTB combined with LET is a safe procedure that shows good objective and subjective outcomes, and a high rate of return to the same level of sport. Reducing rotational instability and strain on intra-articular reconstructed structures results in a low rate of complications and failure.

Radiographic Incidence of Knee Osteoarthritis After Isolated ACL Reconstruction Versus Combined ACL and ALL Reconstruction: A Prospective Matched Study From the SANTI Study Group

BACKGROUND

Combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) and anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) have demonstrated reduced risk of graft rerupture as compared with isolated ACLR. However, concerns remain that the risk of osteoarthritis (OA) may be increased by the addition of ALLR.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of OA with isolated ACLR in comparison with ACLR + ALLR at medium-term follow-up. We hypothesized that there would be no differences between the groups.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ACLR + ALLR with hamstring tendon autograft between January 2011 and March 2012 were propensity matched to patients who underwent isolated ACLR with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) or hamstring tendon autograft in the same period. Medium-term radiographic evaluation was performed using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) radiographic OA grading scale, modified Kellgren-Lawrence grade, and the surface fit method to assess percentage of joint space narrowing. Clinical outcomes were assessed with the following measures: IKDC, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Lysholm, Tegner, and ACL Return to Sport after Injury.

RESULTS

A total of 80 patients (42 ACLR + ALLR and 38 isolated ACLR) were analyzed with a mean follow-up of 104 months. There was no significant difference between groups for joint space narrowing in the medial or lateral tibiofemoral or lateral patellofemoral (PF) compartment. However, 36.8% in the isolated ACLR group versus 11.9% in the ACLR + ALLR group had narrowing of the medial PF compartment (P = .0118). A lateral meniscal tear increased the risk of lateral tibiofemoral narrowing by nearly 5 times (odds ratio, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.547-19.367; P = .0123). The risk of medial PF narrowing was >4-fold with an isolated ACLR (odds ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.44-19.05; P = .0179). Between the isolated ACLR group and the ACLR + ALLR group, the secondary meniscectomy rate was 13.2% versus 11.9% (not significantly different). There was no difference between groups in KOOS, Tegner, or IKDC scores. There was also no difference between groups for grades of osteoarthritic change for any classification system. Patients who received a BPTB graft had medial PF joint narrowing in 66.7% of cases as compared with 11.9% in those who received ACLR + ALLR (P = 0.118).

CONCLUSION

ACLR + ALLR did not increase the risk of OA in the lateral tibiofemoral compartment when compared with an isolated ACLR at medium-term follow-up. Isolated ACLR using BPTB was associated with a significantly increased risk of medial PF joint space narrowing.

REGISTRATION

NCT05123456 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Comparison of Onlay Anchor Fixation Versus Transosseous Fixation for Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis During Revision ACL Reconstruction

Background

There is evidence on the clinical effectiveness of the Lemaire technique for lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), but the best fixation technique is unknown.

Purpose

To compare the clinical outcomes of 2 fixation techniques after revision ACLR: (1) onlay anchor fixation, which would avoid tunnel conflict and physis injury, and (2) transosseous tightening and interference screw fixation. Pain at the area of LET fixation was also assessed.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

This was a retrospective 2-center study of patients with first-time revision ACLR and either LET with anchor fixation (aLET) with a 2.4-mm suture anchor or LET with transosseous fixation (tLET). Outcomes at minimum 12-month follow-up were assessed with the International Knee Documentation Committee score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, visual analog scale for pain at the LET fixation area, Tegner score, and anterior tibial translation (ATT). A subgroup analysis within the aLET group investigated passing the graft over or under the lateral collateral ligament (LCL).

Results

In total, 52 patients were included (26 patients in each group); the mean ± SD follow-up was 13.7 ± 3.4 months. No statistically significant differences were detected between the groups with respect to patient-reported outcome scores, clinical examination, or instrumented testing (side-to-side difference in ATT at 30° of flexion; aLET, 1.5 ± 2.5 mm; tLET, 1.6 ± 1.7 mm). Clinical failure was detected in 1 patient with aLET and none with tLET. Subgroup analysis revealed a small, nonsignificant flexion deficit in knees in which the iliotibial band strand was passed under (n = 42) or over (n = 10) the LCL. No clinically relevant tenderness was detected at the area of LET fixation in any group (aLET, 0.6 ± 1.3; tLET, 0.9 ± 1.7; over the LCL, 0.2 ± 0.6; under the LCL, 0.9 ± 1.6).

Conclusion

Onlay anchor fixation and transosseous fixation of the LET were equivalent with respect to outcome scores and instrumented ATT testing. Clinically, there were minor differences in passage of the LET graft over or under the LCL.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision Plus Lateral Extra-Articular Procedure Results in Superior Stability and Lower Failure Rates Than Does Isolated Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision but Shows No Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes or Return to Sports

PURPOSE

To determine whether comparative clinical studies demonstrate significant advantages of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (RACLR) combined with a lateral extra-articular procedure (LEAP), with respect to graft rupture rates, knee stability, return to sport rates, and patient-reported outcome measures, compared with isolated RACLR.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses Guidelines. A PubMed search was conducted using the key words "revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction" combined with any of the following additional terms, "lateral extra-articular tenodesis" OR "anterolateral ligament reconstruction" OR "Lemaire." All relevant comparative clinical studies were included. Key clinical data were extracted and evaluated.

RESULTS

Eight comparative studies (seven Level III studies and a one Level IV study) were identified and included. Most studies reported more favorable outcomes with combined procedures with respect to failure rates (0%-13% following RACLR+LEAP, and 4.4%-21.4% following isolated RACLR), postoperative side-to-side anteroposterior laxity difference (1.3-3.9 mm following RACLR+LEAP and 1.8-5.9 mm following isolated RACLR), and high-grade pivot shift (0%-11.1% following RACLR+LEAP and 10.2%-23.8% in patients following isolated RACLR). There were no consistent differences between isolated and combined procedures with respect to return to sport or patient-reported outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review demonstrates that the addition of a LEAP to RACLR was associated with an advantage with respect to ACL graft failure rates and avoidance of high-grade postoperative knee laxity across almost all included studies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, Systematic review of level III to IV studies.

In slope-changing osteotomy one millimeter is not one degree: results of an artificial intelligence-automated software analysis

BACKGROUND

Anterior closing wedge osteotomies (ACWO) are performed in revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery to correct an excessive posterior tibial slope (PTS).

PURPOSE

With the help of automated planning software, this study investigates the assumption that 1mm of wedge height gives 1° of slope correction (1:1).

METHODS

Fifty patients underwent ACWO, with the wedge height calculated using the 1:1 formula. Pre- and postosteotomy PTS were measured manually, and the achieved post-operative PTS was compared with the target PTS of 5.3° ± 1.9. The X-ray analysis was repeated virtually with the automated software, which also recommended a resection height. These parameters were then compared with the manually obtained parameters.

RESULTS

Using a 1:1 formula, wedge heights of 8.5mm ± 2.3 was resected to achieve a PTS of 4.2° ± 0.32. This showed an overcorrection of 1.6° ± 0.8 from the target slope. This was consistent with the data from the automated software, which recommended a lower wedge height of 7.7mm ± 2.9.

CONCLUSION

In trans-tubercle ACW, using a wedge height (mm) to slope correction (°) ratio of 1:1 can lead to slight over-correction. Automated software planning is useful for planning correction osteotomies in the sagittal plane.

Surgical Treatment for Avulsion Fractures of the Anterolateral Ligament Associated with Periarticular Fractures of the Knee

The existence and anatomy of the anterolateral ligament (ALL) of the knee are a somewhat controversial topic in orthopaedic surgery. The fixation of the avulsion fracture of the ALL (Segond fracture), associated with periarticular knee fractures, is rarely given much consideration while the major fracture fragments are reconstructed. This study aims to confirm the existence of ALL and evaluate the clinical outcomes of surgical management for avulsion fractures, involving its insertion, when associated with periarticular knee fractures. Twenty-three patients (16 males and 7 females) with avulsion fractures of the ALL associated with periarticular knee fractures were fixed with a spider plate, cannulated screw, or suture anchor. Eight patients were diagnosed with distal femoral fracture, 10 with tibial plateau fracture, and 5 with tibial eminence avulsion fracture. All patients underwent X-rays at follow-up. Clinical and functional outcomes were assessed with the pivot-shift test, objective and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm score, and Tegner activity scale. The ALL was found and identified as a distinct ligamentous structure in all patients. Prior to Segond repair, patients had significantly more instability, as determined by pivot-shift test, than seen postoperatively (p < 0.0001). At final follow-up, the mean subjective IKDC score was 83.2 ± 10.3. Fourteen patients were graded A, 6 were graded B, and 3 was graded C on the IKDC objective score. The mean Lysholm score was 85.4 ± 12.2. The mean Tegner score was 7.5 ± 1.2. This study confirmed that the ALL is a distinct structure in the anterolateral portion of the knee. The fixation of the avulsion fracture of the ALL associated with periarticular knee fractures can be an effective procedure without specific complications. Long-term and comparative follow-up studies are necessary to confirm the effects.

Comparison of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Versus Without Anterolateral Augmentation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

It is clear that the anterolateral ligament has an important role in rotational knee stability. However, whether patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) can benefit from anterolateral augmentation (ALA) is still controversial.

Purpose

To compare the effects of isolated ACLR versus ACLR combined with ALA (ACLR+ALA) on clinical outcomes and knee stability.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods

The methodology followed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A literature search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was undertaken to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing isolated ACLR with ACLR+ALA for the treatment of ACL injuries in the last 15 years. The Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool and the revised Jadad scale were utilized by 2 independent reviewers to determine the quality of RCTs. Relevant data were extracted and compared between procedures, and heterogeneity across the RCTs was assessed using the I ² statistic.

Results

The initial search yielded 849 articles. A total of 14 studies (1850 patients; 941 ACLR and 909 ACLR+ALA) satisfied the eligibility criteria for the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between the procedures in terms of patient-reported outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee score, Tegner score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) or return-to-sport rates. However, patients who underwent ACLR+ALA had better knee stability based on the pivot-shift test (risk ratio [RR], 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02 to 1.10]; P = .0008), Lachman test (RR, 1.03 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.07]; P = .04), and side-to-side difference in anterior laxity (standardized mean difference, -0.55 [95% CI, -0.98 to -0.12]; P = .01) as well as a lower incidence of graft failure (RR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.19 to 0.45]; P < .01) compared with patients who underwent isolated ACLR.

Conclusion

ALA can be considered as a reinforcement of ACLR to improve anteroposterior and anterolateral rotational stability of the knee and reduce the risk of failure. The patient-reported outcomes of isolated ACLR were similar to those of ACLR+ALA, and both procedures provided improved knee function.

Failure modes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The reason for graft failure after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is multifactorial. Controversies remain regarding the predominant factor and incidence of failure aetiology in the literature. This review aimed to provide a meta-analysis of the literature to evaluate the relative proportion of various failure modes among patients with ACLR failure.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EBSCO databases were searched for literature on ACLR failure or revision from 1975 to 2021. Data related to causes for ACLR surgical failure were extracted, and a random effects model was used to pool the results, which incorporates potential heterogeneity. Failure modes were compared between different populations, research methods, graft types, femoral portal techniques, and fixation methods by subgroup analysis or linear regression. Funnel plots were used to identify publication bias and small-study effects.

RESULTS

A total of 39 studies were analyzed, including 33 cohort studies and six registry-based studies reporting 6578 failures. The results showed that among patients with ACLR failure or revision, traumatic reinjury was the most common failure mode with a rate of 40% (95% CI: 35-44%), followed by technical error (34%, 95% CI: 28-42%) and biological failure (11%, 95% CI: 7-15%). Femoral tunnel malposition was the most common cause of the technical error (29%, 95% CI: 18-41%), with more than two times higher occurrence than tibial tunnel malposition (11%, 95% CI: 6-16%). Traumatic reinjury was the most common factor for ACLR failure in European populations and in recent studies, while technical errors were more common in Asian populations, earlier studies, and surgery performed using the transtibial (TT) portal technique. Biological factors were more likely to result in ACLR failure in hamstring (HT) autografts compared to bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autografts.

CONCLUSION

Trauma is the most important factor leading to surgical failure or revision following ACLR. Technical error is also an important contributing factor, with femoral tunnel malposition being the leading cause of error resulting in failure.

Editorial Commentary: During Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction, Lateral Extra-Articular Procedures Have Risks and Should be Reserved for Proper Indications: Do Not LET ALL Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions Be the Same

Recently, there has been renewed interest in performing a lateral extra-articular procedure (LEAP), either an anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction or a LET (lateral extra-articular tenodesis) to address a deficiency of the anterolateral complex (ALC) of the knee during anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The ALC consists of the superficial and deep aspects of the iliotibial band with its Kaplan fiber attachments on the distal femur, along with the ALL, a structure within the anterolateral capsule. The ALC functions to provide anterolateral rotatory stability as a secondary stabilizer of the ACL. The evidence to date is that the addition of a LEAP to a revision ACL reconstruction may reduce the risk of repeat graft failure and rotatory laxity. However, in some cases, performing a LEAP may not confer any additional benefit and add unwarranted risk including lateral pain, reduced quadriceps strength, longer time to recovery, and overconstraint of the lateral compartment with associated cartilage damage. Perhaps LEAP is best indicated for high-risk patients (young, active in pivoting sports, high-grade pivot-shift, generalized ligamentous laxity or knee hyperextension, Segond fracture, chronic ACL lesion, lateral femoral notch sign, lateral coronal plane laxity, concurrent meniscus repair, or ALC injury on magnetic resonance imaging). Other modifiable risk factors should not be ignored (graft choice, graft size, tunnel position, graft fixation, associated injuries such as a lateral meniscal root tear, or anatomic factors such as an increased posterior tibial slope). Do not LET ALL revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions be the same! A lateral extra-articular procedure may sometimes, but not always, reduce the risk of further failure.

Function and strain of the anterolateral ligament part II: reconstruction

PURPOSE

Anterolateral rotatory instability (ALRI) may result from isolated ruptures of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) or combined lesions with the anterolateral ligament (ALL). Biomechanical studies have demonstrated that the ALL contributes to the overall rotational stability of the knee. The purpose of this study was to investigate the biomechanical function of anatomic ALL reconstruction (ALL_rec) in the setting of a combined ACL and ALL injury and reconstruction. The hypothesis was that combined ACL reconstruction (ACL_rec) and ALL_rec (ACL/ALL_rec) significantly reduces internal rotation and shows load sharing between both reconstructions compared with isolated ACL_rec.

METHODS

Eight fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were evaluated using a six degrees of freedom knee simulator. Continuous passive motion and external loads were tested. Kinematic differences between ACL_rec and combined ACL/ALL_rec were compared. Additionally, ACL graft tension and ALL graft strain were measured continuously throughout the testing protocol.

RESULTS

Combined anatomic ACL/ALL_rec significantly improved the internal rotatory stability compared with isolated ACL_rec at 30°-90° under an internal rotation moment. During a static pivot-shift test, additional ALL_rec showed no significant reduction of ap-translation. ALL_rec resulted in an increase in ACL graft tension during continuous passive motion and with additional internal rotation moment.

CONCLUSION

In the case of a combined ACL and ALL deficiency, concurrent ACL_rec and ALL_rec significantly improved the rotatory stability of the knee compared with solely reconstructing the ACL at flexion angles ≥ 30°. Nevertheless, additional ALL_rec with fixation at 60° and with low tension could not restore extension-near rotatory stability. For that reason, ALL_rec with fixation at 60° flexion cannot be recommended in clinical application.

The Addition of Either an Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction or an Iliotibial Band Tenodesis Is Associated With a Lower Failure Rate After Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Retrospective Comparative Trial

PURPOSE

To compare the failure rate in patients who underwent revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction alone or associated with an extra-articular procedure. Secondary objectives were to compare ACL laxity, patient-reported outcome measures, and complication rates in these patients and, subsequently, to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction associated with anatomical anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction or lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET).

METHODS

This was a retrospective comparative study. Patients were classified into 2 groups, according to whether (group 2) or not (group 1) an extra-articular reconstruction was performed. Patients who underwent an extra-articular procedure were further divided into ALL reconstruction (group 2A) and LET (group 2B). Baseline demographic variables, operative data and postoperative data were evaluated.

RESULTS

The groups with (86 patients) and without (88 patients) an associated extra-articular reconstruction had similar preoperative data. Group 2 had a lower failure rate (4.6% vs 14.7%; P = .038), better KT-1000, better pivot-shift, and better Lysholm. There was no difference regarding complications, except more lateral pain in group 2. Regarding the groups who underwent ALL reconstruction (41 patients) and LET (46 patients), group 2A showed better Lysholm scores. Both groups had similar failure rates and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction with a laterally based augmentation procedure had a lower failure rate than patients who underwent isolated revision ACL reconstruction. KT-1000 and pivot-shift examination were also significantly better when a lateral augmentation was performed. Complications were similar except for an increase in lateral pain in the augmented group. No clinically important differences were found when comparing the LET group to the ALL group other than a statistical improvement in the Lysholm functional scale, likely not clinically meaningful, favoring the ALL group and an increased duration of post-operative lateral pain in the LET group.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Editorial Commentary: Autograft, Early Surgery, 2-Stage Surgery for 1 cm of Tunnel Widening or Greater, and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction or Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis May Improve Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision Surgery

Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a challenging procedure. Results are less satisfactory than those of primary ACLR owing to bone defects, altered anatomic landmarks, and concomitant injuries. Modifiable factors such as autograft, early surgery, 2-stage surgery for 1 cm of tunnel widening or greater, and anterolateral ligament reconstruction or lateral extra-articular tenodesis may improve outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament revision surgery. Finally, it is important to consider patients' expectations after revision ACLR when counseling patients and making surgical decisions.

Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Results in Superior Rotational Stability Compared with Isolated Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in High Grade Pivoting Sport Patients: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial

The purpose of the current randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction and to compare them with those of isolated ACL reconstruction. The hypothesis was that combined ACL and ALL reconstruction will result in superior clinical outcomes in terms of the rotational stability of the knee. This prospective RCT included 57 patients (44 men and 13 women, mean age = 31 ± 7.1 years) who underwent ACL reconstruction either isolated (Group I: 25 patients) or combined with ALL reconstruction (Group II: 32 patients). The evaluation of the patients was done preoperatively and postoperatively at 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months including a clinical examination (Lachman's test, Pivot shift's test, and Rolimeter differential anterior laxity), an objective clinical scores (objective: the International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] score) and a subjective clinical scores (subjective: IKDC's score, Lysholm's score, and Tegner's activity score). Postoperative complications of all the patients were recorded. There was a significant difference between the study groups at all follow-up intervals when evaluating the postoperative pivot shift test (p < 0.05) with a superior rotational stability in the group of combined ACL and ALL reconstruction. At the final follow-up evaluation, 36% of the patients from Group I and 6.2% in Group II had a grade I positive pivot shift test (p < 0.05). There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding the number of patients with a grade A IKDC objective score (p < 0.05) at the 6- and 12-month follow-up intervals (p = 0.007). There was a significant difference concerning the IKDC subjective score between the two study groups in favor of the combined ACL and ALL reconstruction group at 12 months postoperatively (p = 0.048). Combined ACL and ALL reconstruction technique was demonstrated to be effective in obtaining a superior control of the rotational knee instability and to improve the clinical objective and subjective outcomes when compared with isolated ACL reconstruction in sports patients with high-grade pivoting shifts.

Functional results of multiple revision anterior cruciate ligament with anterolateral tibial tunnel associated with anterolateral ligament reconstruction

Background

Revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions are usually complex owing to previous tunnels. The objective of this study is to report the results of a revision ACL reconstruction technique with a tibial tunnel performed from the anterolateral plateau associated with an anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction.

Methods

Patients with at least two ACL reconstructions that failed and who had significant enlargement and confluence of tunnels in the medial tibial plateau and underwent revision ACL reconstruction associated with ALL reconstruction with the tibial tunnel for the ACL performed from the lateral plateau between 2017 and 2019 were evaluated. All patients were evaluated by physical examination, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Lysholm functional scales.

Results

Six patients who underwent this surgical procedure were evaluated. All patients were sports practitioners and presented a grade 3 pivot shift. The mean age was 28.5 ± 8.2 years, and the mean follow-up time was 34.1 ± 12.8 months. No patient had a new graft rupture, but three (50%) had grade 1 pivot shift. Four patients had minor complications with no clinical impact on the final result. All except one patient were able to return to pre-injury type of sports, at a mean time of 14.6 ± 2.3 months after surgery.

Conclusion

The anterolateral tibial tunnel technique using an Achilles tendon allograft for revision ACL reconstruction after multiple failures associated with an ALL reconstruction showed good results and no major complications. The anterolateral tunnel can be considered a good alternative in cases of medial tibial confluence or significant enlargement of the medial tunnels in re-revision procedures.

The orientation of the ALL femoral tunnel to minimize collision with the ACL tunnel depends on the need or not of far-cortex drilling

PURPOSE

To (1) evaluate the optimal drill orientation of the anterolateral ligament (ALL) femoral tunnel to minimize collision with the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) femoral tunnel during anatomical ACL reconstruction according to the need for far-cortex drilling and (2) investigate the geometric factors that affect tunnel collision secondary to drill orientation of the ALL femoral tunnel.

METHODS

A three-dimensional femoral model of patients who underwent anatomical single-bundle ACL reconstruction between 2015 and 2016 was constructed, and the geometric factors were evaluated. Virtual ALL femoral tunnels were created to simulate 45 drilling conditions. For each condition, whether the virtual ALL femoral tunnel and its trajectory violated the femoral cortex and the minimum distance between tunnels was investigated.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine subjects were included. Overall violation rates of the femoral cortex by the ALL tunnels and its trajectories were 11.1% (195 of 1755 conditions) and 40.7% (714 of 1755 conditions), respectively. A drilling angle of axial 0° and coronal - 40° showed the longest minimum distance between tunnels without femoral cortex violation by the ALL tunnel (6.3 ± 4.0 mm; collision rate 2.6% [1 of 39 subjects]). With simultaneous consideration of the ALL tunnel's trajectory representing far-cortex drilling, a drill angle of axial 40° and coronal 10° showed the longest minimum distance between tunnels without femoral cortex violation (0.6 ± 3.9 mm; collision rate 38.5% [15 of 39 subjects]). For surgical techniques requiring far-cortex drilling, regression analyses were performed on geometric factors that could affect tunnel collision, which revealed that the sagittal inclination angle of the ACL and the distance between the ACL femoral tunnel's outlet and ALL's femoral attachment were associated with tunnel collision.

CONCLUSION

The optimal drill orientations of the ALL femoral tunnel to minimize collision with the ACL femoral tunnel were axial 0° and coronal - 40° for surgical techniques not requiring far-cortex drilling and axial 40° and coronal 10° for techniques requiring far-cortex drilling. For techniques requiring far-cortex drilling, additional adjustment for orientation of the ACL femoral tunnel is required to reduce the risk of tunnel collision. Therefore, an individualized surgical strategy should be applied according to the graft fixation method of the ALL femoral tunnel.

Clinical Outcomes After Combined ACL and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Versus Isolated ACL Reconstruction With Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Grafts: A Matched-Pair Analysis of 2018 Patients From the SANTI Study Group

BACKGROUND

Bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autografts are widely considered the standard for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The aims of this study were to compare the clinical outcomes after ACLR with gold standard BPTB autografts versus combined ACLR + anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) with hamstring tendon (HT) autografts at medium-term follow-up in a large series of propensity-matched patients. The hypothesis was that combined ACLR + ALLR with HT autografts would result in lower graft rupture rates and non-graft rupture-related reoperation rates.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients undergoing combined ACLR + ALLR using HT autografts between January 2003 and December 2019 were propensity matched in a 1:1 ratio to patients undergoing isolated ACLR using BPTB autografts. At the end of the study period, graft ruptures, contralateral knee injuries, and any other reoperations or complications after the index procedure were identified by a search of a prospective database and a review of medical records.

RESULTS

A total of 1009 matched pairs were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 101.3 ± 59.9 months. Patients in the isolated group were >3-fold more likely to have graft failure than those in the combined group (hazard ratio, 3.554 [95% CI, 1.744-7.243]; P = .0005). Patients aged <20 years were at a particularly high risk of graft ruptures compared with patients aged >30 years (hazard ratio, 5.650 [95% CI, 1.834-17.241]; P = .0002). Additionally, there was a significantly higher reoperation rate after isolated ACLR than after combined ACLR + ALLR (20.5% vs 8.9%, respectively; P < .0001). The overall rate of subsequent contralateral ruptures was 9.1% after index surgery (isolated: 10.2%; combined: 8.0%; P = .0934), indicating that the risk profiles for both groups were similar.

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent isolated ACLR with BPTB autografts experienced significantly worse graft survivorship and overall reoperation-free survivorship compared with those who underwent combined ACLR + ALLR with HT autografts. The risk of graft ruptures was >3-fold higher in patients who underwent isolated ACLR using BPTB autografts.

A Review of Current Concepts of the Anterolateral Complex of the Knee

The anterolateral complex (ALC) of the knee has gained increased interest over the last decades due to the high revision rates of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Furthermore, in patients with an ACL tear, the injury of at least one of the ALC's anatomic structures has been shown to be significantly higher, thus affecting its secondary stabilizing role at the knee joint. As such, ACLR augmentation techniques, that embrace the ALC, have been proposed recently, and indications for these procedures are still evolving. This review aims to present and discuss the most current anatomical, biomechanical, and imaging data, current reconstruction techniques, and the clinical results of ALC reconstruction.

Combined ACL and ALL reconstruction reduces the rate of reoperation for graft failure or secondary meniscal lesions in young athletes

PURPOSE

Graft failure and secondary meniscal tears are major concerns after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in young athletes. The aim was to evaluate the link between ACL reconstruction with and without anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction and outcomes in young patients participating in pivoting sports.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of data collected prospectively. Patients less than 20 years, involved in pivoting sports and undergoing primary ACL reconstruction with a quadruple hamstring tendon (4HT) graft or 4HT graft combined with anterolateral ligament reconstruction (4HT + ALL) were included. Survival analysis was performed to identify the prognostic indicators for reoperation due to graft failure or secondary meniscal lesions. Knee laxity was assessed and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 203 patients (mean (± SD) age: 16.3 ± 2 years) with a mean follow-up of 4.8 ± 0.9 (range: 3.3‒6.8) years were included. There were 101 4HT and 102 4HT + ALL grafts. Graft rupture rates were 11.9% for 4HT grafts and 5.8% for 4HT + ALL grafts (n.s.). There were 9.9% secondary meniscal procedures for 4HT grafts vs. 1.9% for 4HT + ALL grafts (p = 0.02). With reoperation for graft failure or secondary meniscal lesions at final follow-up as the endpoint, survival was better in the 4HT + ALL group (91.4% vs. 77.8%, respectively; p = 0.03). Absence of ALL reconstruction (HR = 4.9 [95%CI: 1.4-17.9]; p = 0.01) and preoperative side-to-side laxity > 3 mm (HR = 3.1 [95%CI: 1.03-9.1]; p = 0.04) were independently associated with an increased rate of reoperations. Mean (± SD) side-to-side laxity was 1.3 ± 1.3 mm (range: - 2 to 5) for 4HT grafts vs. 0.9 ± 1.3 mm (range: - 6 to 4.8) for 4HT + ALL grafts (n.s.) 6 months post-surgery. The rate of return to the same sport at the same level was 42.2% for 4HT grafts vs. 52% for 4HT + ALL grafts (n.s.). There was no significant difference in subjective outcomes including PROMs between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Combined ALL + ACL reconstruction reduced the rate of graft failure and secondary meniscal injury in young athletes when compared to ACL reconstruction alone. Subjective results were comparable, with a similar rate of complications. Combined reconstruction should be preferred in this young population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Procedures Using the Iliotibial Band Autograft

The Micheli anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) procedure is a combined intra-articular and extra-articular knee stabilization technique that combines lateral augmentation with ACL reconstruction using the iliotibial band as an autograft for both aspects of the technique. Its primary indication is for ACL reconstruction in skeletally immature patients with more than 2 years of growth remaining. Studies have shown it to be effective at restoring knee biomechanics to have minimal risk of complications, including those associated with growth disturbances and a relatively low ACL graft rupture rate. Additional studies are needed to better understand the potential utilization of this technique and related modifications in the marginally skeletally immature patient, skeletally mature adolescent, adult, and revision ACL reconstruction settings.

Editorial Commentary: Nonanatomic Lateral Extra-Articular Procedures Performed at the Time of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Risk Overconstraint: Anatomic Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Does Not

Isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is associated with a risk of graft rupture that is more than 5-fold higher than that of combined anterior cruciate ligament-anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction at a mean follow-up of greater than 100 months. However, biomechanical and clinical studies report that overconstraint is a concern with nonanatomic lateral-sided reconstruction. In fact, the normal biomechanics of the native ALL are anisometric. The ligament is tight in extension (providing rotational control) and slack in flexion (allowing physiological internal rotation). The ALL femoral attachment is proximal and posterior to the lateral epicondyle. The tibial tunnel or tunnels are located anterior to the fibular head and posterior to the Gerdy tubercle. An ALL graft must lie deep to the iliotibial band and superficial to the lateral collateral ligament. Fixation is performed in extension and neutral rotation. A single- or double-strand technique may be used. Surgeons performing lateral extra-articular procedures must understand the technical pitfalls that can lead to overconstraint and must seek to avoid them. Overconstraint can occur for a number of reasons, including the use of nonanatomic reconstruction and technical errors in tensioning, fixation angle, and tunnel positioning.

Graft choices for anterolateral ligament knee reconstruction surgery: Current concepts

The anterolateral ligament (ALL) is a primary structure of the anterolateral complex of the knee that contributes to internal rotational stability of the joint. Injury of the ALL is commonly associated with rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament. If left untreated, ALL lesions may lead to residual anterolateral rotational instability of the knee after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, which is a common cause of anterior cruciate ligament graft failure. The function of the ALL can be restored by lateral extraarticular tenodesis or anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR). In the lateral extraarticular tenodesis procedure, a strip of the iliotibial band is placed in a non-anatomical position to restrain the internal rotation of the tibia, while in ALLR, a free graft is fixed at the insertion points of the native ALL. Gracilis and semitendinosus grafts have mainly been utilized for ALLR, but other autografts have also been suggested. Furthermore, allografts and synthetic grafts have been applied to minimize donor-site morbidity and maximize the size and strength of the graft. Nevertheless, there has been no strong evidence to fully support one method over another thus far. The present review presents a detailed description of the graft choices for ALLR and the current literature available in regard to the effectiveness and outcomes of published surgical techniques.

Overview of the anterolateral complex of the knee

In the last few years, much more information on the anterolateral complex of the knee has become available. It has now been demonstrated how it works in conjunction with the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) controlling anterolateral rotatory laxity. Biomechanical studies have shown that the anterolateral complex (ALC) has a role as a secondary stabilizer to the ACL in opposing anterior tibial translation and internal tibial rotation. It is of utmost importance that surgeons comprehend the intricate anatomy of the entire anterolateral aspect of the knee. Although most studies have only focused on the anterolateral ligament (ALL), the ALC of the knee consists of a functional unit formed by the layers of the iliotibial band combined with the anterolateral joint capsule. Considerable interest has also been given to imaging evaluation using magnetic resonance and several studies have targeted the evaluation of the ALC in the setting of ACL injury. Results are inconsistent with a lack of association between magnetic resonance imaging evidence of injury and clinical findings. Isolated ACL reconstruction may not always reestablish knee rotatory stability in patients with associated ALC injury. In such cases, additional procedures, such as anterolateral reconstruction or lateral tenodesis, may be indicated. There are several techniques available for ALL reconstruction. Graft options include the iliotibial band, gracilis or semitendinosus tendon autograft, or allograft.

Anterolateral complex of the knee: State of the art

Rotatory instability of the knee represents the main reason for failure and poor clinical outcomes regarding anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction techniques. It is now clear that the anterolateral complex (ALC) of the knee possesses a fundamental role, in association with the ACL, in controlling internal rotation. Over the past decade, ever since the anterolateral ligament has been identified and described as a distinct structure, there has been a renewed interest in the scientific community about the whole ALC: Lateral extra-articular tenodesis have made a comeback in association with ACL reconstructions to improve functional outcomes, reducing the risks of graft failure and associated injuries. Modern ACL reconstruction surgery must therefore investigate residual instability and proceed, when necessary, to extra-articular techniques, whether functional tenodesis or anatomical reconstruction.This review aims to investigate the latest anatomical and histological descriptions, and the role in rotational control and knee biomechanics of the ALC and its components. The diagnostic tools for its identification, different reconstruction techniques, and possible surgical indications are described.. In addition, clinical and functional results available in the literature are reported.

Clinical and mechanical outcomes in isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction vs additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis or anterolateral ligament reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been a successful treatment for ACL rupture. However ongoing rotational instability can be an issue. Several surgical techniques have been recommended to overcome this including lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and more recently anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR).

AIM

To compare the clinical outcomes following ACL reconstruction (ACLR) alone or ACLR with either LET or ALLR.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted by means of four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and Clinical.Trials.Gov), and the Reference Citaion Analysis (https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/) to identify all studies investigating either or both of LET and ALLR. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for cohort studies was employed for critical appraisal and evaluation of all twenty-four studies which met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Pooled meta-analyses illustrated that ACLR with additional LET or ALLR results in improved pivot shift test scores, compared to isolated ACLR. There was no statistically significant difference in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) clinical scores with addition of either LET or ALLR. ACL re-rupture rates were compared between LET and ALLR techniques. There was a statistically significant difference between techniques, with a 1.14% rupture rate in ACLR +ALLR, and 4.03% rupture rate in ACLR + LET. Isolated ACLR re-rupture rates were 12.59%, significantly higher than when augmented with either ALLR or LET (P < 0.0001 for both groups). There were no statistical differences in pivot shift test or IKDC scores between LET and ALLR techniques.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis has found that use of either LET or ALLR in addition to ACLR results in improved mechanical outcomes suggesting surgeons should consider augmenting ACLR with an extra-articular procedure in patients with rotatory instability. Furthermore, both anterolateral extra articular procedures in addition to ACLR lead to reduced ACL re-rupture rates compared to isolated ACLR. Moreover, ALLR results in reduced ACL re-rupture rates, compared to LET. More research is needed to compare the two respective extra-articular procedures.

Higher return to pre-injury type of sports after revision anterior ligament reconstruction with lateral extra-articular tenodesis compared to without lateral extra-articular tenodesis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the rate of return to pre-injury type of sports (RTS type) in patients after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) compared to patients after revision ACLR without LET.

METHODS

Seventy-eight patients who underwent revision ACLR with an autologous ipsilateral bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft with and without LET were included at least one year after surgery (mean follow-up: 43.9, SD: 29.2 months). All patients filled in a questionnaire about RTS type, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective form (IKDC_subjective), and the Tegner activity score.

RESULTS

The RTS type for revision ACLR with LET was 22 of 42 (52%), whereas 11 of 36 (31%) of the patients who underwent revision ACLR without LET returned to the pre-injury type of sport (p = 0.05). No significant differences were found in KOOS subscores, IKDC_subjective, and Tegner activity scores.

CONCLUSION

An additional LET increases the rate of RTS type after revision ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Combined Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction

There has been a substantial increase in the number of revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions performed in the past decade. This Technical Note describes combined revision ACL and anterolateral ligament reconstruction using outside-in drilling, which avoids the need for 2-stage revision ACL reconstruction because it allows unconstrained anatomic placement.

Iliotibial band autograft is a suitable alternative graft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes

PURPOSE

Despite encouraging clinical, biomechanical and histological results, ACL reconstruction using the ITB was slowly abandoned. The hypothesis was that the current literature supports the use of ITB as the graft of choice for ACL reconstruction because of its good outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was performed in the PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Ovid databases to identify published clinical studies relevant to ACL reconstruction with ITB autograft and studies comparing ITB autograft with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and hamstring (HT) autografts (none were found). The results of the eligible studies were analyzed in terms of graft failure, instrumented knee laxity measurements, Lachman test, pivot-shift test, Lysholm score, objective and subjective International Knee Documentation committee (IKDC) scores, Tegner activity score, return to sports rate, return to sports at pre-injury level and complications.

RESULTS

Nineteen clinical studies including 1,210 patients with ACL reconstruction met the inclusion criteria. Graft failure occurred after ITB autograft in 4.2% of patients. Postoperative mean side-to-side laxity was 1.41 mm with 21% of patients having greater than 3 mm side-to-side difference. Lachman test and pivot-shift test were negative (grade 0) in 57% and 85%, respectively, and were grade 0 or 1 in 95% and 97%, respectively. Functional outcomes were satisfactory in 84% of patients with good to excellent results (Lysholm score > 84). Mean postoperative Lysholm score was 93.3 and 84% of patients had an objective IKDC grade of A or B. Mean postoperative Tegner score was 6.8. The return to sports rate was 89% and 61% of patients returned to their pre-injury level. A comparison of 89 ITB versus 80 BPTB autografts revealed no significant differences in graft failure (n.s.), instrumented mean side-to-side knee laxity difference (n.s.) or Tegner score (n.s.).

CONCLUSION

The graft survival rate and clinical and functional outcomes for ITB autograft are satisfactory. By allowing ACL reconstruction and lateral tenodesis to be done with a single, continuous, pedicled graft through an outside-in femoral tunnel, this technique may become the preferred alternative for primary or secondary ACL surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Risk of Graft Rupture After Adding a Lateral Extra-articular Procedure at the Time of ACL Reconstruction: A Retrospective Comparative Study of Elite Alpine Skiers From the French National Team

BACKGROUND

Elite alpine skiing is associated with a particularly high risk of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries, including graft ruptures. Despite a considerable focus on prevention, a reduction in injury rates has not been observed since the 1980s.

PURPOSE

To determine whether elite alpine skiers undergoing ACL reconstruction (ACLR) with a lateral extra-articular procedure (LEAP) had a lower rate of ACL graft rupture when compared with those who underwent isolated ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Elite skiers from the French ski team who had undergone ACLR, with or without a LEAP, and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years were identified from the national ski team database. Rates of secondary ACL injury were determined via interrogation of the database, review of medical notes, and a final telemedicine interview. A multivariable analysis using the penalized Cox model was performed to explore the relationship among graft rupture, surgical procedure type, and any potential explanatory variables.

RESULTS

Among 81 ACLR procedures analyzed, 50 were isolated and 31 were combined with a LEAP, which was performed using modified Lemaire or anterolateral ligament reconstruction. Graft rupture rates were 34.0% in the isolated ACLR group and 6.5% in the ACLR + LEAP group. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that adding a LEAP was associated with a significant reduction in risk of ACL graft rupture when compared with isolated ACLR (hazard ratio [HR], 5.286 [95% CI, 1.068-26.149]; P = .0412). Age (HR, 1.114; P = .1157), sex (HR, 1.573; P = .3743), and ACL graft type (HR, 1.417; P = .5394) were not significant risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Combined ACLR and LEAP were associated with a significant reduction in the rate of ACL graft rupture in elite alpine ski athletes. Those treated with isolated ACLR remain at extremely high risk of a second ACL injury.

Trends in Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction and Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis With ACL Reconstruction in Children and Adolescents

Background:

Anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) and lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) show promise in lowering the risk of rerupture after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), but there are little data on surgeon practices and preferences in children and adolescents.

Purpose:

To quantify surgeon practices regarding ALLR and LET in the pediatric population.

Study Design:

Cross-sectional study.

Methods:

An electronic survey was administered to 87 surgeons in the Pediatric Research in Sports Medicine society. The questionnaire asked several questions about surgeon and practice characteristics as well as indications, preferences, and techniques for ALLR or LET in the context of primary and revision pediatric ACLR. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used to evaluate factors that affect surgical preferences.

Results:

A total of 63 surgeons completed the survey, of whom 62% performed ≥50 pediatric ACLRs annually; 56% sometimes performed anterolateral augmentation with primary ACLR, and 79% with revision ACLR. The most common indications for ALLR or LET in the primary setting were high-grade pivot shift, knee hyperextension, generalized laxity, and type of sports participation. Surgeons whose practice was >75% sports medicine were more likely to perform ALLR or LET with both primary and revision ACLR (P = .005 and P < .001, respectively). Those who had completed a sports medicine fellowship were more likely to perform these procedures than those with only pediatric orthopaedic training, in both primary (68% vs 36%; P = .01) and revision scenarios (92% vs 60%; P = .002). Of the 28 respondents who did not perform ALLR or LET with primary ACLR, 75% cited insufficient evidence as the reason. However, 96% of surgeons who did perform these procedures expressed interest in studying them prospectively, and 87% were willing to randomize patients.

Conclusion:

Findings indicated that 56% of pediatric sports surgeons sometimes perform anterolateral augmentation with primary ACLR and 79% with revision ACLR. Surgeons with sports medicine fellowship training or a mostly sports practice were more likely to perform these procedures. Insufficient evidence was the most common reason given by surgeons who did not perform anterolateral augmentation. However, there was substantial willingness to prospectively study and even randomize pediatric patients to assess the impact of ALLR or LET in this population.