The outcomes of one-stage treatment for multiple knee ligament injuries combined with extensor apparatus rupture

Extensor Mechanism Disruption Impacts Treatment of Dislocated and Multiligament Injured Knees: Treatment and Schenck Classification Recommendations Based on a Global Delphi Method

BACKGROUND

Multiligament knee injury (MLKI) with associated extensor mechanism (EM) involvement is a rare injury, with limited evidence to guide optimal treatment. The purpose of this study was to identify areas of consensus among a group of international experts regarding the treatment of patients with MLKI and concomitant EM injury.

METHODS

Utilizing a classic Delphi technique, an international group of 46 surgeons from 6 continents with expertise in MLKI undertook 3 rounds of online surveys. Participants were presented with clinical scenarios involving EM disruption in association with MLKI, classified using the Schenck Knee-Dislocation (KD) Classification. Positive consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement with responses of either "strongly agree" or "agree," and negative consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement with "strongly disagree" or "disagree."

RESULTS

There was a 100% response rate for rounds 1 and 2 and a 96% response rate for round 3. There was strong positive consensus (87%) that an EM injury in combination with MLKI significantly alters the treatment algorithm. For an EM injury in conjunction with a KD2, KD3M, or KD3L injury, there was positive consensus to repair the EM injury only and negative consensus regarding performing concurrent ligamentous reconstruction at the time of initial surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of bicruciate MLKI, there was overall agreement on the significant impact of EM injury on the treatment algorithm. We therefore recommend that the Schenck KD Classification be updated with the addition of the modifier suffix "-EM" to highlight this impact. Treatment of the EM injury was judged to have the highest priority, and there was consensus to treat the EM injury only. However, given the lack of clinical outcome data, treatment decisions need to be made on a case-by-case basis with consideration of the numerous clinical factors that are encountered.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Little clinical evidence exists to guide the surgeon on the management of EM injury in the setting of a multiligament injured or dislocated knee. This survey highlights the impact that EM injury has on the treatment algorithm and provides some guidance for management until a further large case series or prospective studies are undertaken.

Poorer functional Outcomes in Patients with Multi-Ligamentous Knee Injury with Concomitant Patellar Tendon Ruptures at 5 years Follow-Up

PURPOSE

Multi-ligamentous knee injuries (MLKIs) are high-energy injuries that may infrequently present with concomitant patellar tendon rupture. There is limited information in the literature regarding these rare presentations, with even less information regarding clinical outcomes. Using propensity-score matching, the purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of MLKIs with and without patellar tendon ruptures and to investigate the overall predictors of these outcomes.

METHODS

Twelve patients who underwent surgical repair for combined MLKI and patellar tendon rupture from 2011 to 2020 with minimum 1-year follow-up data were identified from two separate institutions. Patients were propensity-score matched with a 1:1 ratio with controls based on age, body mass index (BMI), gender, and time from surgery. Patient-reported outcomes included International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form, Lysholm and Tegner scores.

RESULTS

Twelve MLKIs with concomitant patellar tendon injuries were identified out of a multicenter cohort of 237 (5%) patients sustaining MLKI and were case matched 1:1 with 12 MLKIs without extensor mechanism injuries. The average follow-up was 5.5 ± 2.6 years. There were no differences in Schenck Classification injury patterns. There were significant differences found across IKDC (Patellar Tendon mean: 53.1 ± 24.3, MLKI mean 79.3 ± 19.6, P < 0.001) and Lysholm scores (Patellar Tendon mean: 63.6 ± 22.3, MLKI mean 86.3 ± 10.7, P < 0.001) between the two, illustrating poorer outcomes for patients with concomitant patellar tendon ruptures.

CONCLUSION

In the setting of MLKI, patients who have a concomitant patellar tendon rupture have worse functional outcomes compared to those without. This information will be important for patient counseling and might be considered to be added to Schenck classification, reflecting its prognostic value.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

A Meta-Analysis of Systemic Evaluation of Knee Ligament Injury or Intervention of Knee Proprioceptive Function Recovery

OBJECTIVE

The knee ligaments, as a passive knee joint stability device, provide protection for the knee joint and ensure its functional integrity. This role has long been known and recognized by people. The original purpose of knee ligament reconstruction after knee ligament injury is to restore its anatomical structure and mechanical stability mechanism.

METHODS

Taking athletes as the research object, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on improving ankle joint function of athletes related to proprioception training at home and abroad were included. The search time was from the establishment of the database to December 31, 2019, and the references of related documents were traced. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of the literature. RevMan 5.3 software was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

The extensor strength, flexor strength, and flexor strength/extensor strength of the affected limb were higher than before the operation one year after surgery (P < 0.01). The Lysholm score, Lysholm instability score, and one-foot jump distance were all higher than those before surgery (P < 0.05); the difference of KT-2000 for both knees was smaller than that before surgery (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In maintaining the anterior stability of the knee joint, the knee ligament provides 85% static resistance to prevent the tibia from moving forward, so knee ligament injury will cause knee instability. The proprioceptive feedback mechanism plays an important role in maintaining the functional stability of joints.

Anatomical repair and ligament bracing of Schenck III and IV knee joint dislocations leads to acceptable subjective and kinematic outcomes

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of anatomical repair and ligament bracing for Schenck III and IV knee dislocation (KD).

METHODS

The results of 27 patients (15 and 12 cases of Schenck III and IV KD, respectively) after a mean follow-up of 18.1 ± 12.1 months (range 6-45 months) were retrospectively reviewed. Twenty-two patients suffered high-kinetic-energy accidents, whereas five patients suffered ultralow-velocity (ULV) trauma due to obesity. The outcome measures were the Lysholm score, Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee score, Knee Society Score (KSS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Short Form 36 (SF-36) score. A kinematic 3D gait analysis with five walking trials was performed to compare the patients and healthy controls.

RESULTS

The mean KSS, HSS score, Lysholm score, and KOOS were 77.4 ± 14.4, 84.6 ± 11.2, 81.5 ± 10.4, and 67.3 ± 16.8, respectively. No intra- or postoperative complications occurred. The mean range of motion deficiency compared to the healthy side was 24.4 ± 18.5°. Ten patients had first-degree residual laxity of the anterior cruciate ligament; 12 and 2 patients had first- and second-degree residual laxity of the collateral ligament, respectively. Five patients underwent additional arthroscopic arthrolysis due to arthrofibrosis at an average of 6.2 ± 1.9 months (range 4-9 months) after the initial surgery. The 3D gait analysis showed no major differences in joint stability or movement between the patients and healthy controls. Only the ULV trauma patients had significantly lower outcome scores and showed larger kinematic deviations in joint movement during the gait analysis.

CONCLUSION

Anatomical repair with ligament bracing is a suitable surgical procedure in the treatment of KD and provides evidence in clinical practice with the benefit of early, definitive repair and preservation of the native ligaments. Patients reach acceptable subjective and objective functional outcomes, including mainly normalized gait patterns during short-term follow-up, with only minor changes in kinematics and spatial-temporal characteristics. Obese patients who suffered ULV trauma showed significantly inferior outcomes with larger deviations in joint kinematics.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.