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

Computer Patient-Specific 3D Modeling and Custom-Made Guides for Revision ACL Surgery

Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a challenging surgery occurring in 3 to 24% of primary reconstructions. A meticulous planning to study the precise size and location of both femoral and tibial bone tunnels is mandatory. The aim of the study was to evaluate the intra- and interoperator differences in the decision-making process between experienced surgeons after they were asked to make preoperative planning for ACL revision reconstruction with the use of both the computed tomography (CT) scan and a three-dimensional (3D)-printed model of the knee. Data collected from 23 consecutive patients undergoing revision of ACLR for graft failure at a single institute between September 2018 and February 2020 were prospectively reviewed. The double-blinded collected data were presented to three board-certificate attending surgeons. Surgeons were asked to decide whether to perform one-stage or two-stage revision ACLR based on the evaluation of the CT scan images and the 3D-printed custom-made models at two different rounds, T0 and T1, respectively, 7 days apart one from the other. Interoperator consensus following technical mistake was 52% at T0 and 56% at T1 using the CT scans, meanwhile concordance was 95% at T0 and 94% at T1 using the 3D models. Concordance between surgeons following new knee injury was 66% at T0 and 70% at T1 using CT scans, while concordance was 96% both at T0 and T1 using 3D models. Intraoperative variability using 3D models was extremely low: concordance at T0 and T1 was 98%. McNemar test showed a statistical significance in the use of 3D model for preoperative planning (p < 0.005). 3D-printed model reliability resulted to be higher compared with CT as intraoperator surgery technique selection was not modified throughout time from T0 to T1 (p < 0.005). The use of 3D-printed models had the most impact when evaluating femoral and tibial tunnels, resulting to be a useful instrument during preoperative planning of revision ACLR between attending surgeons with medium-high workflow.

Complex Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision and Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis With Achilles Tendon Allograft: The "Monoloop" Technique

Revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) presents many challenges that are not encountered in the primary setting and, therefore, requires thorough preoperative planning. Recently, there has been growing evidence showing that combining the anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction with ACL-R revision reduces the risk of postoperative ACL rupture and meniscal tears, and therefore, the ALL reconstruction becomes essential to a complex ACL revision. The technique that we describe is mainly used in the setting of complex ACL revision with extensive tunnel osteolysis associated with rotational instability of the knee. This article presents a technique for a one-stage complex ACL-R revision combined with ALL reconstruction using an Achilles tendon allograft with a bone plug.

Anterolateral augmentation procedures during anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions in skeletally immature patients: Scoping review of surgical techniques and outcomes

Purpose

Graft failure rates after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in children and adolescents are higher compared to adults. Anterolateral augmentation procedures have recently generated increased focus regarding their ability to reduce graft failure rates. Concerns in skeletally immatures are potential growth disturbances and overconstraint after anterolateral augmentation. The aim of this scoping review is to provide an overview of all current anterolateral augmentation procedures in skeletally immature patients and to discuss surgical techniques, clinical and biomechanical outcomes.

Methods

This scoping review was performed following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) statement extension for scoping reviews. On 22 December 2022, an information specialist performed a systematic literature search in Cochrane, PubMed (Medline) and EMBASE databases. Inclusion criteria were anterolateral augmentation procedures, including lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR), in combination with ACLR in skeletally immatures.

Results

Twenty studies were included after screening 1.485 abstracts. Seventeen studies describe LET techniques, four studies ALLR techniques and one study both techniques. Biomechanical data is scarce and shows conflicting results. Two studies compared ACLR with LET to ACLR in skeletally immatures with promising results in favour of the combined procedure. There were no differences in outcomes between LET and ALLR.

Conclusions

Several LET and ALLR techniques have been described for skeletally immature patients and the first clinical data on LET and ALLR is available, which showed promising results. Further research is necessary to evaluate the risk of growth disturbances and overconstraint in skeletally immatures.

Level of Evidence

Level IV.

Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the ipsilateral Quadriceps tendon autograft: a modular reconstructive option

PURPOSE

Failed ACL reconstruction is a common occurrence nowadays due to the increased incidence of ACL surgeries and return to full activities following the surgery. Several challenges might stand in the face of this revision surgery particularly the graft harvest and its suitability to the situation with possible widening of the tunnel and the avoidance of additional morbidity at the contralateral side or anterior knee pain as in patellar tendon harvest. The aim of this study is to evaluate the ipsilateral quadriceps tendon as a source of autograft in revision ACL surgery which constitutes a viable option that can potentially decrease the morbidity of the procedure, and meanwhile provide a graft substitute that can be tailored to suit the dilated tunnels commonly encountered in revision surgery, thus giving the patients a good potential for better functional outcome.

METHODS

Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction was done in 30 patients using the ipsilateral quad tendon as a pure soft tissue or with a bony fragment.

RESULTS

The mean subjective international Knee Documentation Committee score (IKDC score) at two years follow-up was 65.83 ± 7.20. There is statistically significant improvement of the objective as well as the subjective IKDC scores at the end of follow-up when compared to the preoperative as well as the 6-month evaluation figures. The KT1000 arthrometer recorded a mean of 4.50 ± 1.07. Significant improvement of the limb symmetry index was at two years duration.

CONCLUSIONS

The quadriceps tendon can be a solution for several challenges that might appear during the revision ACL surgery with comparable results to other tendons and with minimal morbidity on the function of the harvested muscle tendon.

Consistent Indications and Good Outcomes Despite High Variability in Techniques for Two-Stage Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically review the current literature regarding the indications, techniques, and outcomes after 2-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

METHODS

A literature search was performed using SCOPUS, PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses statement. Inclusion criteria was limited to Level I-IV human studies reporting on indications, surgical techniques, imaging, and/or clinical outcomes of 2-stage revision ACLR.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 355 patients treated with 2-stage revision ACLR were identified. The most commonly reported indications were tunnel malposition and tunnel widening, with knee instability being the most common symptomatic indication. Tunnel diameter threshold for 2-stage reconstruction ranged from 10 to 14 mm. The most common grafts used for primary ACLR were bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft, hamstring graft, and LARS (polyethylene terephthalate) synthetic graft. The time elapsed from primary ACLR to the first stage surgery ranged from 1.7 years to 9.7 years, whereas the time elapsed between the first and second stage ranged from 21 weeks to 13.6 months. Six different bone grafting options were reported, with the most common being iliac crest autograft, allograft bone dowels, and allograft bone chips. During definitive reconstruction, hamstring autograft and BPTB autograft were the most commonly used grafts. Studies reporting patient-reported outcome measures showed improvement from preoperative to postoperative levels in Lysholm, Tegner, and objective International Knee and Documentation Committee scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Tunnel malpositioning and widening remain the most common indications for 2-stage revision ACLR. Bone grafting is commonly reported using iliac crest autograft and allograft bone chips and dowels, whereas hamstring autograft and BPTB autograft were the most used grafts during the second-stage definitive reconstruction. Studies showed improvements from preoperative to postoperative levels in commonly used patient reported outcomes measures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I, III, and IV studies.

Anterior cruciate ligament failure and management

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction failure can be defined as abnormal knee function due to graft insufficiency with abnormal laxity or failure to recreate a functional knee according to the expected outcome. Traumatic ruptures have been reported as the most common reason for failure. They are followed by technical errors, missed concomitant knee injuries, and biological failures. An in-depth preoperative examination that includes a medical history, clinical examinations, advanced imaging, and other appropriate methods is of utmost importance. There is still no consensus as to the ideal graft, but autografts are the favorite choice even in ACL revision. Concomitant meniscal treatment, ligamentous reconstruction, and osteotomies can be performed in the same surgical session to remove anatomical or biomechanical risk factors for the failure. Patient expectations should be managed since outcomes after ACL revision are not as good as those following primary ACL reconstruction.

Double-bundle non-anatomic ACL revision reconstruction with allograft resulted in a low revision rate at 10 years

PURPOSE

This study aimed at reporting the long-term second revision rate and subjective clinical outcomes from a cohort of patients who underwent a double-bundle (DB) ACLR first revision with allograft at a single institution.

METHODS

The Institutional database was searched according to the following inclusion criteria: (1) patients that underwent DB-ACL first revision with Achilles tendon allograft, (2) surgery performed between January 2000 and December 2012, (3) age at revision ≥ 18 y/o. Patients' general information, history, surgical data, and personal contacts were extracted from charts. An online survey platform was implemented to collect responses via email. The survey questions included: date of surgeries, surgical data, date of graft failure and subsequent second ACL revision surgery, any other surgery of the index knee, contralateral ACLR, KOOS score, and Tegner scores.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients were included in the survival analysis, mean age at revision 32 ± 9.2 y/o, 71 males, mean BMI 24.7 ± 2.7, mean time from ACL to revision 6.8 ± 5.4 years, mean follow-up time 10.7 ± 1.4 years. There were 12 (15%) second ACL revisions during the follow-up period, three females and nine males, at a mean of 4.5 ± 3 years after the index surgery. The overall survival rates were 85% from a second ACL revision and 68% from all reoperations of the index knee. Considering only the successful procedures (61 patients), at final follow-up, the mean values for the KOOS subscales were 84 ± 15.5 for Pain, 88.1 ± 13.6 for Symptoms, 93 ± 11.6 for ADL, 75 ± 24.5 for Sport, and 71 ± 19.6 for Qol. Twenty-nine (48%) patients performed sports activity at the same level as before ACLR failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Double-bundle ACL revision with fresh-frozen Achilles allograft yields satisfactory results at long-term follow-up, with an 85% survival rate from a second ACL revision at mean 10 years' follow-up and good patient-reported clinical scores.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.