Failure Rates and Complications After Multiple-Revision ACL Reconstruction: Comparison of the Over-the-Top and Transportal Drilling Techniques

Hamstring autografts demonstrate either similar or inferior outcomes to quadriceps or bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review of comparative studies

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical outcomes in patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (r-ACLR) using hamstring tendon (HT) autografts with those using either quadriceps tendon (QT) or bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autografts or allografts.

METHODS

Three databases were searched on 8 August 2023. The authors adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (R-AMSTAR) guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data on demographics, surgical details, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), rates of instability, failure and return to sport (RTS) were extracted.

RESULTS

Eleven studies comprising 859 patients were included in this review. Five studies compared HT and QT autografts. One study each reported greater IKDC scores (p = 0.04) and Tegner scores (p = 0.04) in the QT group, while one study each reported higher anterior translation (p = 0.04), rates of positive pivot shift (p = 0.03) and rates of failure (p = 0.03) in the HT group. Six studies compared HT and BPTB autografts with one study each reporting greater Lysholm scores (p = 0.02) and less side-to-side anterior laxity (p < 0.01) in the BPTB group. Two studies compared HT autografts with allografts with only one study reporting a faster time to RTS in the HT group than the allograft group (p < 0.001). All other comparisons were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

HT autografts result in either similar or inferior outcomes in r-ACLR when compared to QT or BPTB autograft options. Allografts resulted in similar outcomes to HT autografts apart from greater time to RTS for r-ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Combination With Meniscal and Osteochondral Allograft Transplantation for Complex Knee Injury

Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) may present a challenge as a result of several factors, including malpositioned bone tunnels, tunnel osteolysis, and the presence of previous hardware. In addition, concomitant pathology, specifically meniscal and cartilaginous injuries, may be present and should be addressed to minimize the risk of re-rupture. Revision ACLR and treatment of accompanying injuries can be performed either as a 1-stage or 2-stage procedure, yet the latter may increase surgical risk for the patient and extend recovery time. The over-the-top technique serves as a good option for revision ACLR and can be performed with careful consideration of patient-specific anatomy and with proper surgical planning. Therefore, this Technical Note aims to present our 1-stage surgical technique for revision ACLR using over-the-top technique with an Achilles tendon allograft, along with concomitant treatment for meniscal deficiency and a medial femoral condyle chondral defect using meniscal and osteochondral allografts, respectively.

Patients submitted to re-revision ACL reconstruction present more knee laxity, more complications, and a higher failure rate than patients submitted to the first revision ACL reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Few comparative studies have evaluated patients who underwent two revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and patients who underwent one revision ACLR, and many of them have a short postoperative follow-up and a relatively small number of patients. The objective of this study is to evaluate the functional results, complications, and failure rates of patients who underwent one revision ACLR and patients who underwent two revision ACLRs.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study comparing patients who underwent one revision ACLR (Group 1) with patients who underwent a re-revision ACLR (Group 2). Baseline demographic variables, operative data and post-operative data were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among the 266 patients included, 226 were from Group 1 and 40 from Group 2. Patients in Group 2 had greater rotatory laxity and were more often subjected to associated osteotomy at the time of revision surgery. Postoperatively, patients from Group 2 reported poorer subjective IKDC score and showed greater knee laxity measured with the KT-1000 arthrometer, although both probably not clinically relevant. The complication rate was high in both groups, with a higher incidence in Group 2. Reconstruction failures were also higher in Group 2 (20% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Patients from Group 2 underwent a higher rate of associated osteotomy procedures, present higher complication rates and a higher failure rate compared with patients from Group 1. However, the functional scores (Lysholm and IKDC score) and the physical examination (KT-1000 and pivot-shift) did not show clinically relevant differences between the groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Effect of Different Screw Materials on ACL Reconstruction With the Tape Locking Screw Technique: A Retrospective Study From the FAST Cohort

Background

Screws for graft fixation are available in 3 different materials for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with the Tape Locking Screw (TLS) technique: titanium, poly-l-lactic acid bioabsorbable, and polyetheretherketone (PEEK).

Purpose

To compare the effect of the 3 different fixation materials on graft and implant survival after ACLR with the TLS technique.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Included were 521 patients from the French Prospective ACL Study (FAST) cohort who underwent primary surgical ACLR with the TLS technique. Patients were divided into 3 groups depending on the type of screw material used: titanium (TLS-T group), poly-l-lactic acid bioabsorbable (TLS-B group), or PEEK (TLS-P group). The primary endpoint was a retear within 2 years after ACLR. The secondary endpoints were complication rate, return to sports rate, and functional scores. Objective and subjective functional scores-including the International Knee Documentation Committee, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and the Lysholm score-were evaluated preoperatively and at the 2-year follow-up. Pain was assessed with the KOOS-Pain subscore recorded pre- and postoperatively every 6 months up to 2 years. Patient satisfaction was recorded at the 2-year follow-up.

Results

No significant differences between the study groups were found in retear rates (4.4%, 4.5%, and 4.3% in the TLS-T, TLS-P, and TLS-B groups 2 years after surgery) or subjective and objective outcomes. The TLS-T group had the lowest rate of intraoperative implant-related complications (0.9%) compared with the TLS-P (4.3%) and TLS-B (7.7%) groups. Young age was a significant risk factor for retear in the TLS-T (P = .03) and TLS-B (P = .0001) groups, while a high level of sports was found to be a significant risk factor in the TLS-P (P = .04) group. All functional scores improved significantly at the 2-year follow-up (P < .0001), with no significant group difference. The KOOS-Pain subscore improved continuously with no significant group difference. The rate of return to preinjury sports was between 43.4% and 58.6%. The rate of highly satisfied patients at the final follow-up was between 86.2% and 91.8%.

Conclusion

There was no difference in retear rate or objective and subjective functional scores between implant materials for TLS ACLR in this study.

A Single-Center, Observational Study Assessing Functional Outcomes After Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Suspensory Tibial Fixation With a Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) Button

Background Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a crucial procedure in orthopedic surgery. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of ACLR employing suspensory tibial fixation with a polyether ether ketone (PEEK) button. Methodology This retrospective observational study conducted at Sai Shree Hospital, Pune, India, between November 2023 and December 2023 enrolled 47 subjects aged 18-60 years who underwent arthroscopic ACLR utilizing the T-Button-A Adjustable Loop Ultra-High-Molecular-Weight Polyethylene Suture PEEK button. The functional outcomes and patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, the Modified Cincinnati Rating System Questionnaire (MCRS), the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, the Tegner Activity Level (TAL) Scale, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) quality of life subscale. Results Femoral fixation utilized 27 (57.4%) Proloop Ultra Adjustable Loop Button 60 mm, 19 (40.4%) Infiloop Fixed Loop Button 20 mm, and 1 (2.1%) Infiloop Fixed Loop Button 30 mm. Tibial fixation solely relied on T-Button A (PEEK Tibial Button With Adjustable Loop 90 mm). Postoperative evaluations revealed favorable IKDC (79.49 ± 12.67), MCRS (81.32 ± 11.57), SANE (77.83 ± 11.11), TAL Scale (3.87 ± 0.99) and KOOS quality of life subscale (83.81 ± 13.07) scores. Conclusions The findings affirm the efficacy and safety of arthroscopic ACLR utilizing suspensory tibial fixation with the PEEK button, supporting its use for improved patient outcomes.

Approximately half of pediatric or adolescent patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction return to the same level of sport or higher: A systematic review

PURPOSE

To summarise the surgical techniques and clinical outcomes in paediatric and adolescent patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (r-ACLR).

METHODS

Three databases (MEDLINE, PubMed and EMBASE) were searched from inception to 29 July 2023. The authors adhered to the PRISMA and R-AMSTAR guidelines as well as the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data on demographics, surgical details, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), rates of instability, rupture and return to sport (RTS) were extracted.

RESULTS

Eight studies comprising 706 (711 knees) patients were included (48.7% female). The mean age at r-ACLR was 17.1 years (range: 16.5-18.0). Autografts (67.5%) were more common than allografts (32.2%) in revision, with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) being the most prevalent autograft source (59.6%). Bone grafts were used in seven patients (4.8% of 146 patients). The most common femoral and tibial fixation techniques were interference screws (37.6% and 38.1%, of 244 patients, respectively). The most common tunnelling strategy was anatomic (69.1% of 236 patients), and meniscus repairs were performed in 39.7% of 256 patients. The re-rupture rate was 13.0% in 293 patients. RTS at the same level or higher was 51.6% in 219 patients. The mean (SD) Lysholm score was 88.1 (12.9) in 78 patients, the mean (SD) Tegner score was 6.0 (1.6) in 78 patients, and the mean (SD) IKDC score was 82.6 (16.0) in 126 patients.

CONCLUSION

R-ACLR in paediatric and adolescent patients predominantly uses BPTB autografts and interference screw femoral and tibial fixation with concomitant meniscal procedures. Rates of re-rupture and RTS at the same level or higher were 13.0% and 51.6%, respectively. Information from this review can provide orthopaedic surgeons with a comprehensive understanding of the most commonly used operative techniques and their outcomes for revision ACLR in this population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.