Risk Factors for Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Frequency With Which Patients Change Surgeons

Risk factors for reoperation for arthrofibrosis following primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to identify the rate and risk factors for a reoperation for arthrofibrosis following primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

Prospective data recorded in the New Zealand ACL Registry were cross-referenced with data from the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC). Primary ACL reconstructions performed between April 2014 and May 2021 were analysed. The ACC database was used to identify patients who underwent a reoperation for a diagnosis of arthrofibrosis. Multivariable survival analysis was performed to compute adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

A total of 12,296 primary ACL reconstructions were analysed, of which 230 underwent a reoperation for arthrofibrosis (1.9%) at a mean follow-up of 3.6 years. A higher risk of arthrofibrosis was observed in females (aHR = 1.76, p = 0.001), patients with a history of previous knee surgery (aHR = 1.82, p = 0.04) and when a transtibial drilling technique was used (aHR = 1.53, p = 0.03). ACL reconstruction >6 months after injury had the lowest rate of arthrofibrosis (1.3%, aHR = 0.45, p = 0.01). There was no difference in risk between early surgery within 6 weeks versus delayed surgery between 6 weeks and 6 months after injury (2.9% versus 2.1%, aHR = 0.78, not significant).

CONCLUSION

Female sex, previous knee surgery and a transtibial drilling technique increased the risk of reoperation for arthrofibrosis. Early surgery within 6 weeks of injury was not associated with an increased risk when compared with surgery between 6 weeks and 6 months after injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Influence of Surgeon Experience and Clinic Volume on Subjective Knee Function and Revision Rates in Primary ACL Reconstruction: A Study from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry

Background

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) performed by high-volume surgeons/clinics has been associated with increased graft individualization and decreased operating times, complication rates, and total costs.

Purpose

To investigate the influence of surgeon/clinic volume on subjective knee function and revision surgery rates at 2 years after primary ACLR.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry were used to study patients who underwent primary ACLR between 2008 and 2019. Surgeons/clinics were categorized based on a combination of total caseload volume (cutoff: 50 ACLRs/surgeon, 500 ACLRs/clinic) and annual volume (cutoff: 29 ACLRs/year/surgeon, 56 ACLRs/year/clinic). The thresholds of minimal important change (MIC), Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), and treatment failure (TF) relative to the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and KOOS4 (mean score of the KOOS Pain, Symptoms, Sports/Rec, and QoL subscales) were applied. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess variables influencing the MIC, PASS, or TF of the KOOS and KOOS4. Adjusted Cox regression analysis was conducted to determine the hazard ratio of subsequent ACLR.

Results

Of 35,371 patients, 16,317 had 2-year follow-up outcome data and were included. Patients who underwent primary ACLR by high-volume surgeons had significantly higher MIC and PASS rates and lower TF rates when compared with patients who underwent the procedure by low-volume surgeons: MICKOOS4: 70.6% vs 66.3%; PASSKOOS4: 46.0% versus 38.3%; and TFKOOS4: 8.7% versus 11.8% (all P < .02). Significantly decreased odds of achieving MICKOOS4 (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.88) and PASSKOOS4 (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60-0.84) were found for ACLRs performed by low-volume surgeons. Clinic volume did not influence the odds of reaching MIC, PASS, or TF. Overall, 804 patients (2.3%) underwent subsequent ACLR at <2 years, with significantly higher revision rates among patients operated on at high-volume clinics (2.5% vs 1.7%; P < .001). However, in the adjusted Cox regression, surgeon/clinic volume had no influence on subsequent ACLR rates. High-volume surgeons/clinics had decreased time to surgery, operating time, perioperative complication rates, and use of thromboprophylaxis and nonroutine antibiotics (P < .001).

Conclusion

Patients who underwent primary ACLR by high-volume surgeons experienced increased improvement and satisfaction regarding subjective knee function. Factors other than surgical volume influenced subsequent surgery rates. Patients might benefit from undergoing primary ACLR by high-volume providers.

Meniscal repair failure following concurrent primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from the New Zealand ACL Registry

PURPOSE

This study aimed to identify the risk factors for meniscal repair failure following concurrent primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

Prospective data recorded by the New Zealand ACL Registry and the Accident Compensation Corporation were reviewed. Meniscal repairs performed during concurrent primary ACL reconstruction were included. Repair failure was defined as a subsequent reoperation involving meniscectomy of the repaired meniscus. Multivariate survival analysis was performed to identify the risk factors for failure.

RESULTS

A total of 3,024 meniscal repairs were analysed with an overall failure rate of 6.6% (n = 201) at a mean follow-up of 2.9 years (SD 1.5). The risk of medial meniscal repair failure was higher with hamstring tendon autografts (adjusted HR [aHR] = 2.20, 95% CI 1.36-3.56, p = 0.001), patients aged 21-30 years (aHR = 1.60, 95% CI 1.30-2.48, p = 0.037) and in patients with cartilage injury in the medial compartment (aHR = 1.75, 95% CI 1.23-2.48, p = 0.002). The risk of lateral meniscal repair failure was higher in patients aged ≤ 20 years (aHR = 2.79, 95% CI 1.17-6.67, p = 0.021), when the procedure was performed by a low case volume surgeon (aHR = 1.84, 95% CI 1.08-3.13, p = 0.026) and when a transtibial technique was used to drill the femoral graft tunnel (aHR = 2.30, 95% CI 1.03-5.15, p = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

The use of a hamstring tendon autograft, younger age and the presence of medial compartment cartilage injury are risk factors for medial meniscal repair failure, whereas younger age, low surgeon volume and a transtibial drilling technique are risk factors for lateral meniscal repair failure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Risk Factors for Revision or Rerupture After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The rerupture or need for revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a serious complication. Preventive strategies that target the early identification of risk factors are important to reduce the incidence of additional surgery.

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate risk factors for revision or rerupture after ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from database inception to November 2021 and updated in January 2022. Quantitative, original studies reporting potential adjusted risk factors were included. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for potential risk factors.

RESULTS

A total of 71 studies across 13 countries with a total sample size of 629,120 met the inclusion criteria. Fifteen factors were associated with an increase in the risk of revision or rerupture after ACLR: male sex (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.14-1.41), younger age (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05-1.08), lower body mass index (BMI) (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00-1.06), family history (OR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.50-4.08), White race (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.08-1.60), higher posterolateral tibial slope (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.05-1.26), preoperative high-grade anterior knee laxity (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.46-3.64), higher baseline Marx activity level (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.13), return to a high activity level/sport (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.15-3.57), an ACLR within less than a year after injury (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.81-2.32), a concomitant medial collateral ligament (MCL) injury (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.31-2.00), an anteromedial portal or transportal technique (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.22-1.51), hamstring tendon (HT) autografts (vs bone-patellar tendon-bone [BPTB] autografts) (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.40-1.82), allografts (OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.65-4.19), and smaller graft diameter (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05-1.38). The other factors failed to show an association with an increased risk of revision or rerupture after ACLR.

CONCLUSION

Male sex, younger age, lower BMI, family history, White race, higher posterolateral tibial slope, preoperative high-grade anterior knee laxity, higher baseline Marx activity level, return to a high activity level/sport, an ACLR within less than a year from injury, a concomitant MCL injury, an anteromedial portal or transportal technique, HT autografts (vs BPTB autografts), allografts, and smaller graft diameter may increase the risk of revision or rerupture after ACLR. Raising awareness and implementing effective preventions/interventions for risk factors are priorities for clinical practitioners to reduce the incidence of revision or rerupture after ACLR.

Acute and subacute anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions are associated with a higher risk of revision and reoperation

PURPOSE

(1) Report concomitant cartilage and meniscal injury at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), (2) evaluate the risk of aseptic revision ACLR during follow-up, and (3) evaluate the risk of aseptic ipsilateral reoperation during follow-up.

METHODS

Using a United States integrated healthcare system's ACLR registry, patients who underwent primary isolated ACLR were identified (2010-2018). Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression was used to evaluate the risk of aseptic revision, with a secondary outcome evaluating ipsilateral aseptic reoperation. Outcomes were evaluated by time from injury to ACLR: acute (< 3 weeks), subacute (3 weeks-3 months), delayed (3-9 months), and chronic (≥ 9 months).

RESULTS

The final sample included 270 acute (< 3 weeks), 5971 subacute (3 weeks-3 months), 5959 delayed (3-9 months), and 3595 chronic (≥ 9 months) ACLR. Medial meniscus [55.4% (1990/3595 chronic) vs 38.9% (105/270 acute)] and chondral injuries [40.0% (1437/3595 chronic) vs 24.8% (67/270 acute)] at the time of ACLR were more common in the chronic versus acute groups. The crude 6-year revision rate was 12.9% for acute ACLR, 7.0% for subacute, 5.1% for delayed, and 4.4% for chronic ACLR; reoperation rates a 6-year follow-up was 15.0% for acute ACLR, 9.6% for subacute, 6.4% for delayed, and 8.1% for chronic ACLR. After adjustment for covariates, acute and subacute ACLR had higher risks for aseptic revision (acute HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.07-2.72, p = 0.026; subacute HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.01-1.55, p = 0.040) and aseptic reoperation (acute HR 2.04, 95% CI 1.43-2.91, p < 0.001; subacute HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.11-1.54, p = 0.002) when compared to chronic ACLR.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort study, while more meniscal and chondral injuries were reported for ACLR performed ≥ 9 months after the date of injury, a lower risk of revision and reoperation was observed following chronic ACLR relative to patients undergoing surgery in acute or subacute fashions.

Risk Factors for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Graft Failure in Professional Athletes: An Analysis of 342 Patients With a Mean Follow-up of 100 Months From the SANTI Study Group

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are among the most common knee injuries sustained in elite sport, and athletes generally undergo ACL reconstruction (ACLR) to facilitate their return to sport. ACL graft rupture is a career-threatening event for elite athletes.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to determine the risk factors for graft failure in professional athletes undergoing ACLR. It was hypothesized that athletes who underwent combined ACLR with a lateral extra-articular procedure (LEAP) would experience significantly lower rates of graft rupture in comparison with those who underwent isolated ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Professional athletes who underwent primary ACLR with a minimum follow-up of 2 years were identified from the Santy database. Patients were excluded if they underwent major concomitant procedures, including multiligament reconstruction surgery or osteotomy. Further ipsilateral knee injury, contralateral knee injury, and any other reoperations or complications after the index procedure were identified by interrogation of the database and review of the medical notes.

RESULTS

A total of 342 athletes with a mean follow-up of 100.2 ± 51.9 months (range, 24-215 months) were analyzed. Graft failures totaling 31 (9.1%) were reported, requiring revision surgery because of symptomatic instability. The rate of graft failure was significantly higher when ACLR was not combined with a LEAP (15.5% vs 6.0%; P = .0105) and in athletes aged 21 years or younger (13.8% vs 6.6%; P = .0290). A multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox model and demonstrated that athletes undergoing an isolated ACLR were at >2-fold risk of ACL graft rupture (hazard ratio [HR], 2.678 [1.173; 4.837], P = .0164) when compared with those undergoing a combined ACLR with a LEAP. Additionally, athletes aged ≤21 years were also at >2-fold risk of graft failure (HR, 2.381 [1.313; 5.463]; P = .0068) than those aged >21 years. Sex, sport, and graft type were not found to be significant risk factors for graft failure.

CONCLUSION

Professional athletes undergoing isolated ACLR and aged ≤21 years are at >2-fold greater risk of graft failure. Orthopaedic surgeons treating elite athletes should combine an ACLR with a LEAP to improve ACL graft survivorship.

Controversies in ACL revision surgery: Italian expert group consensus and state of the art

Background

Revision ACL reconstruction is a complex topic with many controversies and not-easy-to-make decisions. The authors’ aim is to provide some feasible advice that can be applied in daily clinical practice with the goal of facilitating the decision-making process and improving the outcomes of patients subjected to revision ACL reconstruction.

Methods

A national survey with seven questions about the most controversial topics in revision ACL reconstruction was emailed to members of two societies: SIOT and SIAGASCOT. The participants’ answers were collected, the most recent literature was analyzed, and a consensus was created by the authors, according to their long-term surgical experience.

Conclusions

The decision-making process in revision ACL reconstruction starts with a standardized imaging protocol (weight-bearing radiographs, CT scan, and MRI). One-stage surgery is indicated in almost all cases (exceptions are severe tunnel enlargement and infection), while the choice of graft depends on the previously used graft and the dimensions of the tunnels, with better clinical outcomes obtained for autografts. Additional procedures such as lateral extra-articular tenodesis in high-grade pivot-shift knees, biplanar HTO in the case of severe coronal malalignment, and meniscal suture improve the clinical outcome and should be considered case by case.

Level of evidence

V (Expert opinion).

Optimal Graft Choice in Athletic Patients with Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries: Review and Clinical Insights

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is a common sporting-related knee injury with a potentially detrimental impact on the athlete’s career, yet there is no formal consensus on the optimal graft choice for reconstructing the ruptured ACL in this specific population. Options for reconstruction include autograft, allograft, and artificial grafts. However, each has associated failure risk and donor site morbidity. Our operational definition of the athlete is a skeletally mature individual participating in high level activity with the expectation to return to pre-injury level of activity. The athlete has unique injury characteristics, post-operative expectations, and graft demands that differ to the general population. Long-term outcomes are of particular importance given on-going mechanical demands on the reconstructed knee. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to consolidate current literature on the various ACL reconstruction graft options, with a focus on the optimal graft for returning the athlete to activity with the lowest rate of re-injury.

Practice Patterns for Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in an Integrated Health Care System

Background

While surgeons with high caseload volumes deliver higher value care when performing primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), the effect of surgeon volume in the revision setting is unknown.

Purposes

To determine the percentage of revision ACLR procedures that comprise the practice of high-, medium-, and low-volume surgeons and to analyze associated referral and practice patterns.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

We retrospectively investigated all revision ACLR procedures performed between 2015 and 2020 in a single health care system. Surgeons were categorized as low (≤17), medium (18-34), or high (≥35) volume based on the number of annual ACLR procedures performed. Patient characteristics, activity level, referral source, concomitant injuries, graft type, and treatment variables were recorded, and a comparison among surgeon groups was performed.

Results

Of 4555 ACLR procedures performed during the study period, 171 (4%) were revisions. The percentage of revision ACLR procedures was significantly higher for high-volume (5%) and medium-volume (4%) surgeons compared with low-volume surgeons (2%) (P < .01). Patients undergoing revision ACLR by a high-volume surgeon had a significantly higher baseline activity level (P = .01). Allografts were used significantly more often by low-volume surgeons (70%) compared with medium-volume (35%) and high-volume (25%) surgeons (P < .01). Bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and quadriceps tendon (QT) autografts were used significantly more often by high-volume (32% BPTB, 39% QT) and medium-volume (38% BPTB, 14% QT) surgeons compared with low-volume surgeons (15% BPTB, 10% QT) (P < .01). High-volume surgeons were more likely to perform revision on patients with cartilage injuries (P = .01), perform staged revision ACLR (P = .01), and choose meniscal repair (54% high vs 22% medium and 36% low volume; P = .03), despite similar rates of concomitant meniscal tears, compared with low- and medium-volume surgeons.

Conclusion

In this registry study of an integrated health care system, high-volume surgeons were more likely to perform revision ACLR on patients with higher activity and competition levels. Additionally, high-volume surgeons more commonly performed staged revision ACLR, chose meniscus-sparing surgery, and favored the use of autografts compared with low-volume surgeons.

More anatomic tunnel placement for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by surgeons with high volume compared to low volume

PURPOSE

Correct placement of the femoral and tibial tunnels in the anatomic footprint during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is paramount for restoring rotatory knee stability. Recent studies have looked at surgeon volume and its outcomes on procedures such as total knee arthroplasty and infection rates, but only few studies have specifically examined tunnel placement after ACLR based on surgeon volume. The purpose of this study was to compare the placement of femoral and tibial tunnels during ACLR between high-volume and low-volume surgeons. It was hypothesized that high-volume surgeons would have more anatomic tunnel placement compared with low-volume surgeons.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all ACLR performed between 2015 and 2019 at an integrated health care system consisting of both academic and community hospitals with 68 orthopaedic surgeons was conducted. Surgeon volume was categorized as less than 35 ACLR per year (low volume) and 35 or more ACLR per year (high volume). Femoral tunnel placement for each patient was determined using an exact strict lateral radiograph (less than 6 mm of offset between the posterior halves of the medial and lateral condyles) taken after the primary ACLR using the quadrant method. The centre of the femoral tunnel was measured in relation to the posterior-anterior (PA) and proximal-distal (PD) dimensions (normal centre of anatomic footprint: PA 25% and PD 29%). Tibial tunnel placement for each patient was determined on the same lateral radiographs by measuring the mid-sagittal tibial diameter and the centre of the tibial attachment area of the ACL from the anterior tibial margin (normal centre of anatomic footprint: 43%). Each lateral radiograph was reviewed by one of two blinded reviewers.

RESULTS

A total of 4500 patients were reviewed, of which 645 patients met all the inclusion/exclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis. There were 228 patients in the low-volume group and 417 patients in the high-volume group. Low-volume surgeons performed a mean of 5 ACLRs per year, whereas surgeons in the high-volume group performed a mean of 40 ACLRs per year. In the PA dimension, the low-volume group had significantly more anterior femoral tunnel placement compared with the high-volume group (32 ± 10% vs 28 ± 9%, p < 0.01). In the PD dimension, the low-volume group had statistically significant more proximal femoral tunnel placement compared to the high-volume group (32 ± 9% vs 35 ± 9%, p < 0.01). For the tibial tunnel, the low-volume group had significantly more posterior tibial tunnel placement compared with the high-volume group (41 ± 10% vs 38 ± 7%, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Low-volume surgeons placed their femoral tunnels significantly more anterior and proximal (high) during ACLR, and placed their tibial tunnels significantly more posterior, compared with high-volume surgeons. Prior research has indicated that anatomic placement of the femoral and tibial tunnels during ACLR leads to improved rotatory knee stability. The findings of this study demonstrate the importance of surgical volume and experience during ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Early Return to Play After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is It Worth the Risk?

Objective

To compare the outcomes of a 6-month-long accelerated rehabilitation with a 12-month-long rehabilitation. There is no consensus on the optimal duration of rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Trends in the past decades have shifted towards accelerated programs, often resulting in a return to play (RTP) at 4–6 months, postoperatively. However, longer rehabilitation cycles have recently experienced renaissance due to a greater understanding of graft remodeling.

Methods

Adult athletes who underwent ACLR between 2015 and 2018 by the same surgeon were included and followed-up prospectively for 24 months. Participants were allocated into two groups based on their RTP (6 months vs. 12 months) and compared with graft elongation, reoperation rate, and sports career (quit or continue) outcomes.

Results

Fifty-four patients underwent accelerated rehabilitation and 92 completed conventional rehabilitation. The accelerated rehabilitation was significantly associated with graft elongation—the accelerated rehabilitation group (n=9) and the conventional rehabilitation group (n=0), p<0.001—and need for reoperation—the accelerated rehabilitation group (n=5) and the conventional rehabilitation group (n=1), p=0.026. Although the relationship between rehabilitation time and quitting competitive sports did not reach significance at 0.05 level (p=0.063), it was significant when p<0.1, thereby showing a clear trend.

Conclusion

Accelerated rehabilitation increased graft elongation risk. Knee laxity ≥3 mm measured at 6 months after ACLR should be accompanied by RTP time frame re-evaluation. Arthrometry checkups or routine magnetic resonance imaging shortly after RTP may be considered in cases of accelerated rehabilitation.

Greater Psychological Readiness to Return to Sport, as Well as Greater Present and Future Knee-Related Self-Efficacy, Can Increase the Risk for an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Re-Rupture: A Matched Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To determine the psychological characteristics and strength outcomes of patients who sustained an early anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) re-rupture after their primary ACL reconstruction and cross-sectionally compare them with a matched cohort of patients who did not sustain a reinjury during the first 2 years after primary ACL reconstruction.

METHODS

In this matched cohort study, data for quadriceps and hamstring strength and 3 hop tests and answers to standardized patient-reported outcomes (the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Return to Sport after Injury scale and a short version of the Knee Self-Efficacy Scale) were extracted from a rehabilitation outcome registry. Data for patients suffering a re-rupture were extracted, and patients were matched in terms of sex, age, and activity level with patients not suffering an ACL re-rupture within 2 years of primary reconstruction. The groups were compared 10 weeks and 4, 8, and 12 months after the primary reconstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 36 patients suffering an ACL re-rupture were matched with 108 patients not suffering a re-rupture after ACL reconstruction. Patients who suffered an ACL re-rupture had greater psychological readiness, that is, greater confidence in performance, lesser negative emotions, and lesser risk appraisal, to return to sport (RTS) at 8 months (81.2 vs 67.9 [95% Δconfidence interval {CI} 2.7-23.8) P = .014) and at 12 months (95.2 vs 67.1, (95% ΔCI 14.3-41.8) P ≤ .001), and greater knee-related self-efficacy at 8 months (8.6 vs 8.0 [95% ΔCI 0.1-1.2], P = .021) and 12 months (9.4 vs 8.1, [95% ΔCI 0.3-2.2] P = .012) after primary ACL reconstruction, compared with the matched group.

CONCLUSIONS

A stronger psychological profile, defined by a greater psychological readiness to RTS and knee-related self-efficacy, may be associated with an ACL re-rupture within 2 years of the primary reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Matched cohort study, level III.

Minimizing the risk of graft failure after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in athletes. A narrative review of the current evidence

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear is one of the most common sport-related injuries and the request for ACL reconstructions is increasing nowadays. Unfortunately, ACL graft failures are reported in up to 34.2% in athletes, representing a traumatic and career-threatening event. It can be convenient to understand the various risk factors for ACL failure, in order to properly inform the patients about the expected outcomes and to minimize the chance of poor results. In literature, a multitude of studies have been performed on the failure risks after ACL reconstruction, but the huge amount of data may generate much confusion.The aim of this review is to resume the data collected from literature on the risk of graft failure after ACL reconstruction in athletes, focusing on the following three key points: individuate the predisposing factors to ACL reconstruction failure, analyze surgical aspects which may have significant impact on outcomes, highlight the current criteria regarding safe return to sport after ACL reconstruction.

Effect of Leg Dominance on Medium- to Long-Term Functional Outcomes, Quality of Life, and Revision Rates After Isolated ACL Reconstruction

Background:

The effect of leg dominance on short-term functional outcomes and return to sports after arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has been evaluated. However, postoperative medium- to long-term recovery and revision rates are not well known.

Purpose:

To investigate whether leg dominance affects medium- to long-term clinical and functional scores and revision rates after ACLR.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Included in this study were 235 patients (205 male and 30 female) who underwent isolated arthroscopic ACLR. Patients were divided according to the leg dominance status of their injured limb into 2 groups: dominant leg injured (120 patients) and nondominant leg injured (115 patients). Preoperative and postoperative functional outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were evaluated using the visual analog scale for pain, Tegner activity scale, Lysholm knee score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation form, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and overall patient satisfaction. Moreover, the revision rates of the 2 groups were compared according to leg dominance, patient characteristics, and operative features.

Results:

The mean follow-up period was 8.0 ± 2.3 years (range, 5-13 years). A significant preoperative to postoperative improvement in range of motion and functional scores was noticed in both groups (P < .001 for all). However, the improvement was significantly higher in the dominant leg group for the Tegner (P = .001), Lysholm (P = .006), and IKDC (P < .001) scores as well as for the SF-36 domain scores for general health (P = .009), social role (P = .048), and emotional role (P = .032). Also, patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the dominant leg group (P = .007). The dominant leg group was associated with a lower revision rate compared with the nondominant leg group (5.8% vs 15.7%, respectively; P = .015).

Conclusion:

High recovery rates were seen after arthroscopic ACLR, regardless of leg dominance. However, leg dominance had a significant effect on postoperative medium- to long-term functional outcomes, HRQoL, and revision rates.

An In-Depth Analysis of Graft Rupture and Contralateral Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture Rates After Pediatric Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Reported rates of graft rupture and contralateral anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture after ACL reconstruction (ACLR) are higher among pediatric patients than adults. Previous series may have underestimated postoperative event risk because of small sample sizes and high proportions of dropouts.

PURPOSE

To calculate rates of graft rupture and contralateral ACL rupture after ACLR in a large pediatric series.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

ACLRs performed in our tertiary care children's hospital system over a period of >7 years were identified through billing review. Cases were sorted based on operative technique, with all-epiphyseal ACLRs considered separately. Transphyseal ACLRs were divided into 2 groups based on patient age, with a cutoff of 16 years. Clinic follow-up data as well as prospectively collected survey data were used to note graft rupture and contralateral ACL rupture events. Rates of graft rupture and contralateral ACL rupture were calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

The final data set included 996 patients. A total of 161 patients underwent all-epiphyseal ACLR. Of the remaining transphyseal surgeries, 504 patients were <16 years of age at the time of surgery and 331 were ≥16 years. The 4-year cumulative rate of graft rupture via Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was 19.7% among all patients. The rate was 18.2% among all-epiphyseal ACLRs, 21.6% among transphyseal ACLRs in patients <16 years, and 16.4% among transphyseal ACLRs in patients ≥16 years (P = .855). Survival analysis estimated the 4-year cumulative rate of contralateral ACL rupture at 12.0% among all patients: 6.63% among all-epiphyseal ACLRs, 15.7% among transphyseal ACLRs in patients <16 years, and 8.05% among transphyseal ACLRs in patients ≥16 years (P = .093).

CONCLUSION

This is the largest series of pediatric ACLRs yet reported, and it shows that the risks of another ACL injury after first-time ACLR are higher than previously reported. The risk of contralateral ACL rupture was lower than that for graft rupture. Our methods, including prospective follow-up surveys and survival analysis to generate cumulative rate estimates, provide a best-practice example for future case series calculations. Our results provide insight into the postoperative course of pediatric patients undergoing ACLR and are crucial for preoperative patient and family counseling. Understanding these risks may also influence return-to-play decisions.