A systematic review of transphyseal ACL reconstruction in children and adolescents: comparing the transtibial and independent femoral tunnel drilling techniques

All-epiphyseal anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction yields superior sports performances than the trans-epiphyseal technique in skeletally immature patients: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears in skeletally immature patients are increasingly common. Evidence comparing the outcomes of all-epiphyseal versus trans-epiphyseal ACL reconstruction in skeletally immature patients is limited, and the current literature could benefit from a comprehensive systematic review. The present study compared all-epiphyseal versus trans-epiphyseal ACL reconstruction in skeletally immature patients. The outcomes of interest were to compare joint laxity, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), return to sport, and complications.

METHODS

This study was conducted according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. In November 2023, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase. No additional filters were used in the database search. All the clinical studies investigating ACL reconstruction in skeletally immature patients were accessed. Only articles that clearly stated the surgical technique (all- or trans-epiphyseal) were eligible. Only articles with a minimum of 6 months of follow-up were included. Only articles that clearly stated that surgeries were conducted in children with open physis were eligible.

RESULTS

Data from 1489 patients (1493 procedures) were collected, of which 32% (490 of 1489 patients) were female. The mean length of follow-up was 46.6 months. The mean age of the patients was 12.7 years. No difference was found in joint laxity (Table 3): positive pivot shift (P = 0.4), positive Lachman test (P = 0.3), and mean arthrometer laxity (P = 0.1). No difference was found in PROMs (Table 4): International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) (P = 0.3), Lysholm (P = 0.4), and Tegner (P = 0.7). The trans-epiphyseal technique was associated with a greater rate of patients unable to return to sports (1% versus 7%, P = 0.0001) and with a longer time to return to sports (7.7 versus 8.6 months, P = 0.01). Though the trans-epiphyseal technique was associated with a lower rate of return to sport, this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.8). No difference was evidenced in the rate of patients who had reduced their league or level of sports activity (P = 0.6) or in the rate of patients who had returned to their previous league or level of sports activity (P = 0.7). No difference was found in the rate of complication: re-tear (P = 0.8), reoperation (P = 0.7), increased laxity (P = 0.9), and persistent instability sensation (P = 0.3).

CONCLUSION

Trans-epiphyseal ACL reconstruction was associated with a greater rate of patients unable to return to sport and with a longer time to return to sport compared with the all-epiphyseal technique in skeletally immature patients. Level of evidence Level III, systematic review.

Management after acute injury of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Part 3: Recommendation on surgical treatment

PURPOSE

The aim of this consensus project was to give recommendations regarding surgical treatment of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injured patient.

METHODS

For this consensus process, an expert, steering and rating group was formed. In an initial online meeting, the steering group, together with the expert group, formed various key topic complexes for which multiple questions were formulated. For each key topic, a structured literature search was performed by the steering group. The results of the literature review were sent to the rating group with the option to give anonymous comments until a final consensus voting was performed. Sufficient consensus was defined as 80% agreement.

RESULTS

During this consensus process, 30 topics regarding the surgical management and technique of ACL reconstruction were identified. The literature search for each key question resulted in 30 final statements. Of these 30 final statements, all achieved consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus process has shown that surgical treatment of ACL injury is a complex process. Various surgical factors influence patient outcomes. The proposed treatment algorithm can be used as a decision aid for the surgeon.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V.