Lower anxiety level to perform movements after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with lateral extra-articular tenodesis compared to without lateral extra-articular tenodesis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the anxiety level to perform movements in patients after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) combined with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) compared to patients after revision ACLR without LET.

METHODS

Ninety patients who underwent revision ACLR with ipsilateral bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft and with a minimum of 12 months follow-up were included in this study. Patients were divided into two groups: patients who received revision ACLR in combination with LET (revision ACLR_LET group; mean follow-up: 29.4 months, range: 12-80 months), and patients who received revision ACLR without LET (revision ACLR group; mean follow-up: 61.1 months, range: 22-192 months). All patients filled in a questionnaire about anxiety level related to physical activity and sports, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective form (IKDCsubjective), and the Tegner Activity Score.

RESULTS

Patients in the revision ACLR_LET group had a significantly lower anxiety level to perform movements than patients in the revision ACLR group (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found in KOOS, IKDCsubjective, and Tegner Activity Scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who received LET in addition to revision ACLR have a lower anxiety level to perform movements than patients with revision ACLR alone, despite non-different subjective functional outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study, Level of evidence: III.

Higher contact pressure of the lateral tibiofemoral joint in lateral extra-articular tenodesis with tensioned graft in external rotation than in neutral rotation: A biomechanical study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the mean contact pressure, peak contact pressure, and mean contact area of the lateral tibiofemoral joint in lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) with tension on the graft in tibial neutral and external rotation.

METHODS

A total of eight Thiel-embalmed cadaveric knees were prepared and divided into two groups (4 knees in each group): the LET-NR group (lateral extra-articular tenodesis tension in neutral rotation) and (2) the LET-ER group (lateral extra-articular tenodesis tension in external rotation). Each knee was prepared according to the corresponding technique. A hydraulic testing system (E10000, Instron) simulates an axial load of 735 ​N for 10 ​s in each group.

RESULTS

The LET-ER group exhibited a statistically significant higher peak contact pressure compared to the LET-NR group. The peak contact pressure values in the LET-NR and LET-ER groups were 702.3 ​± ​233.9 ​kPa and 1235.5 ​± ​171.4 ​kPa, respectively (p ​= ​0.010, 95% CI, -888.0 to -178.5). The mean contact pressure values in the LET-NR and LET-ER groups were 344.9 ​± ​69.0 ​kPa and 355.3 ​± ​34.9 ​kPa, respectively (p ​= ​0.796, 95% CI, -105.1-84.2). The mean contact area values in the LET-NR and LET-ER groups were 36.8 ​± ​3.1 mm2 and 33.3 ​± ​6.4 mm2, respectively (p ​= ​0.360, 95% CI, -5.2-12.2).

CONCLUSIONS

The peak contact pressure of the lateral tibiofemoral joint is greater in LET when the graft is tensioned in external rotation than in neutral rotation. However, no statistically significant difference in the mean contact pressure or the mean contact area was observed between the two groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Lateral extra-articular tenodesis may be more cost-effective than independent anterolateral ligament reconstruction: A systematic review and economic analysis

IMPORTANCE

Anterolateral augmentation during primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) may lower rates of ACL graft failure. However, differences in costs between two techniques, lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR), are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and subsequent cost-effectiveness analysis comparing LET versus ALLR in the setting of primary ACLR. The hypothesis was that LET is more cost-effective than ALLR.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A systematic review was conducted on studies in which patients underwent primary ACLR with a concomitant LET or ALLR with minimum 24 months follow-up published between January 2013 and July 2023. Primary outcomes included ACL graft failure rates and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey-Quality of Life (KOOS-QoL) subscale scores, which were used to determine health utilities measured by quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. A decision tree model with one-way and two-way sensitivity analyses compared the cost of primary ACLR with a concomitant LET, independent autograft ALLR, or independent allograft ALLR. Costs were estimated using a combination of QALYs, institution prices, literature references, and a survey sent to 49 internationally recognized high-volume knee surgeons.

FINDINGS

A total of 2505 knees undergoing primary ACLR with concomitant LET (n=1162) or ALLR (n=1343) were identified from 22 studies. There were 77 total ACL graft failures with comparable failure rates between patients receiving LET versus ALLR (2.9% vs. 3.2%, P=0.690). The average QALYs gained was slightly higher for those who received LET (0.77) compared to ALLR (0.75). Survey results revealed a 5 minute longer median self-reported operative time for ALLR (20 ​min) than LET (15 ​min). The estimated costs for LET, autograft ALLR, and allograft ALLR were $1,015, $1,295, and $3,068, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Anterolateral augmentation during primary ACLR with LET is more cost-effective than independent autograft and allograft ALLR given the lower costs and comparable clinical outcomes. Surgeons may utilize this information when determining the optimal approach to anterolateral augmentation during primary ACLR, although differences in preferred technique and health care systems may influence operative efficiency and material costs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review; Level of evidence, IV.

A review of Marcel Lemaire's original work on lateral extra-articular tenodesis

This classic discusses Marcel Lemaire's original publications in the context of modern surgical practice, including a description of his original lateral extra-articular tenodesis. Previously published in French, these translations shed light on his revelations regarding the anterior cruciate ligament's role in knee stability and his detailed insights into the ressaut rotatoire or the pivot shift phenomenon. We track the evolution of Lemaire's procedure since the publication of his original technique in 1967 which used a nylon cord superficial to the lateral collateral ligament followed by cast immobilisation for one month. We report his patient outcomes as he refines his methods through experiential learning. Lemaire's fundamental concepts in relation to anterior cruciate ligament deficiency remain relevant in contemporary clinical practice. Furthermore, the "modified Lemaire technique" has emerged as one of the preferred methods for lateral extra-articular tenodesis. We hope that disseminating his thoughts to a wider audience will help enlighten the ongoing debate regarding the management of rotatory instability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V - Expert Opinion.

Do lateral extra-articular tenodeses play a role in the control of sagittal knee laxity in short hamstring tendon graft ACL reconstruction? A retrospective study of 80 cases with and without tenodesis

INTRODUCTION

Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) associated with an intra-articular anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) provides better rotational control, especially in knees with injuries to the anterolateral structures that are characterized by the presence of a gross pivot shift. However, the role of LET in the control of sagittal knee laxity remains debated. We hypothesized that LET plays a role in the control of sagittal knee laxity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center, single-surgeon study of 80 patients operated on between January 2014 and December 2016 for a complete primary ACL tear. We compared 43 patients who underwent an isolated short hamstring tendon graft ACLR with 37 patients who underwent an ACLR using intra- and extra-articular grafts. Knee laxity measurements were taken with a GNRB® arthrometer preoperatively, at 1, 3, 6, and 9months (M1-M9), 1year, and at the last follow-up. The side-to-side differences (healthy vs. operated knees) in graft laxity (ΔL in mm) and compliance (ΔC in μm/N) were calculated for each patient from the generated force-displacement curves.

RESULTS

No differences were found between the 2 groups in terms of the ΔL and ΔC evolvement profiles. All laxity parameters decreased significantly between the preoperative assessment and M1. ΔL and ΔC increased at low forces between M1 and M9. ΔL and ΔC stabilized after M9.

DISCUSSION

Sagittal control remains the primary function of the ACL. The anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction and LET do not improve sagittal postoperative laxity.

CONCLUSION

Sagittal laxity measurements recorded during the postoperative period did not show that adding LET to short hamstring tendon graft ACLRs improved either graft laxity or compliance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study.

Clinical outcomes and return to sport after single-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction by bone-patellar tendon autograft combined with lateral extra-articular tenodesis

PURPOSE

The anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) failure rate continues to increase. Involvement of a young population with a desire to return to sport, explains the increased need for ACLR (revACLR) revision. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcome, complications, failure rate and return to sport of a single-stage revACLR using bone patellar tendon-bone (BTBT) combined with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 36 patients who underwent revACLR. Knee stability was assessed by Lachman and Pivot shift test. Objective anterior laxity was determined by KT-2000 arthrometer. The IKDC subjective, Lysholm, ACL-RSI Scores, level of sport activity and Forgotten Joint Score-12 were recorded.

RESULTS

Of 36 patients, we collected data from 17 who underwent single-stage revACLR with autologous BTBT combined with LET, performed using an extra-articular MacIntosh procedure as modified by Arnold-Coker. The side-to-side difference in Lachman test and Pivot shift test significantly improved postoperatively. The subjective IKDC, Lysholm and ACL-RSI significantly improved from 71.4 ± 9.03 to 92 ± 6.9, from 58.3 ± 19.3 to 66.8 ± 27.7 and from 50.4 ± 12.2 to 68.6 ± 24.5, respectively during the post-operative follow-up. Ten patients (58.8%) returned to their desired level of sport. One patient was considered a failure because of the postoperative laxity.

CONCLUSION

Single-stage revACLR with BPTB combined with LET is a safe procedure that shows good objective and subjective outcomes, and a high rate of return to the same level of sport. Reducing rotational instability and strain on intra-articular reconstructed structures results in a low rate of complications and failure.

Lateral augmentation procedures in anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. How to avoid tunnel collision with intraoperative tunnel visualization: A technical note

Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) or anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction can be used as an augmentation procedure in anatomic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and are thought to minimize rotational instability, lower re-rupture rates of the ACL graft and improve functional outcomes after surgery. Young patients with high-grade pivot shift or generalized laxity participating in high demand/pivoting sports are considered as the ideal candidates for such a procedure. Both in LET and in ALL reconstruction, femoral fixation of the graft using an interference screw remains a challenge due to the possibility of tunnel convergence of the two tunnels created in the femur, namely the ACL femoral tunnel and the tunnel created in the lateral femur for the LET or ALL procedure. With this technical note, we aim to describe a safe approach for femoral tunnel creation by providing the surgeon not only with instructions for a safe orientation but also with the possibility to check for a possible tunnel collision by using the arthroscope through the anteromedial portal. Although instructions can be used both for LET and ALL reconstruction (same femoral tunnel), a modified Lemaire LET is extensively described since this procedure is the authors' preference for augmenting anatomic ACL reconstruction.

The Role of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Treatment of Rotatory Knee Instability: a Scoping Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The addition of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) has become increasingly popular to address residual rotatory knee instability. The purpose of this article is to review the anatomy and biomechanics of the anterolateral complex (ALC) of the knee, outline different LET techniques, and provide biomechanical and clinical evidence for its use as an augmentation procedure with ACLR.

RECENT FINDINGS

Rotatory knee instability has been identified as a common contributor to ACL rupture in both the primary and revision settings. Several biomechanical studies have shown that LET reduces strain on the ACL by decreasing excess tibial translation and rotation. Additionally, in vivo studies have demonstrated restoration of side-to-side differences in anterior-posterior knee translation, higher rates of return to play, and overall increased patient satisfaction following combined ACLR and LET. As a result, various LET techniques have been developed to help offload the ACL graft and lateral compartment of the knee. However, conclusions are limited by a lack of concrete indications and contraindications for use of LET in the clinical setting. Recent studies have shown that rotatory knee instability contributes to native ACL and ACL graft rupture and LET may provide further stability to reduce rates of failure. Further investigation is needed to establish concrete indications and contraindications to determine which patients would most benefit from added stability of the ALC.

Current trends in anterior cruciate ligament surgery. A worldwide benchmark study

OBJECTIVES

To benchmark current trends on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) surgery.

METHODS

The largest worldwide ACLR survey to date was performed during May 2020, targeted to reach representation of all continents. It was submitted electronically to all International Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery and Orthopaedic Sports surgeons (n = 3,026), asking those who perform ACLR to respond.

RESULTS

With a final sample size of 2,107, the overall response rate was 69.6%. Median years of practice as orthopaedic surgeon was 15 (range 1-52) and 49.6% of all respondents were defined as high-volume surgeons (>50 ACLR annually). Hamstrings tendon autograft was the preferred graft for primary ACLR (80.3%) and the medial portal femoral drilling was the most frequently used technique (78.5%). Cortical buttons (82.7%) and bioabsorbable screws (62.7%) were the preferred fixation methods for hamstring tendon autograft ACLR in femur and tibia, respectively. Metallic screws (45.2%) were the preferred fixation methods for bone patellar tendon bone autograft in femur and tibia. Most of the respondents routinely used pre-tensioning techniques for their graft preparation (63.8%), but less than half of surgeons preferred antibiotic soaking of the grafts (45.3%). The preferred knee position for graft fixation was 10-30° of knee flexion and neutral rotation (57.0%). The addition of anterolateral augmentation (or extra-articular tenodesis) was infrequent in primary and isolated ACLR (10.0%), but a statistically significant raise was seen for revision surgeries (20.0%). Most used brace in the initial postoperative rehabilitation (54.9%) and the time to allow patients to fully resume sports was at an average of 8.9 ± 2.0 months. Treatment algorithm of paediatric ACL injuries exhibited a low consensus among the respondents.

CONCLUSION

This worldwide survey benchmarks the current trends in ACL reconstruction, achieving the largest participation of surgeons to date. Among the great variety of options available for ACL reconstructions, surgeons' preferences showed some differences according to their location and expertise. Reporting trends in practice, and not only the evidence, is important to medical education and providing patients the safest care possible. This is a Level V, expert opinion study.

An eponymous history of the anterolateral ligament complex of the knee

BACKGROUND

Recent interest has surged in the anterolateral ligament (ALL) and complex (ALC) of the knee. Its existence and role in rotary stability of the knee, particularly in the setting of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, remains a contentious and controversial topic.

UNDERSTANDING THE ALC

We must review our history and recognize the pioneers who pushed our understanding of the ALL forward before it was popularly recognized as a discrete structure. Additionally, given that many eponyms remain in common use related to the ALC, we must standardize our nomenclature to prevent misuse or misunderstanding of terms in the literature. In this review, modern understanding of the anterolateral ligament complex (ALC) is traced to 1829 by exploring eponymous terms first in anatomy and then in surgical technique. Understanding our history and terminology will allow us to better understand the ALC itself.

CONCLUSION

This review aims to provide historical context, define terminology, and provide insight into the clinical relevance of the ALC.

Paediatric reference anatomy for ACL reconstruction and secondary anterolateral ligament or lateral extra-articular tenodesis procedures

OBJECTIVES

For iliotibial band (ITB) lateral extra-articular tenodesis or anterolateral ligamentous/capsular reconstruction with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, a clear understanding of the referenced anterolateral knee anatomy is critical-especially given the risk of injury to the physis or key anterolateral structures in the paediatric population, which is at high-risk for primary and secondary anterior cruciate ligament injury. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively assess the anatomy of the knee physes, paediatric lateral collateral ligament (LCL) origin, popliteus origin and ITB tibial insertion.

METHODS

Nine paediatric cadaveric knee specimens with average age 4.2 years (range 2 months-10 years) underwent dissection to identify the LCL's and popliteus' femoral origins and the ITB's tibial insertion. Metallic marking pins demarcated precise anatomic attachment sites, and subsequent computerised tomography scans enabled quantified measurements among them.

RESULTS

LCL & Popliteus: On the femur, the popliteus origin lay consistently deep to the LCL and inserted both distally and anteriorly to the LCL, a mean distance of 4.6 mm (range 1.9-7.6; standard deviation 2.0). From the joint line, the LCL lay a mean distance of 12.5 mm proximally while the popliteus measured a mean of 8.2 mm. Both were consistently distal to the physis. The LCL was a mean distance of 4.4 mm (range 1.0-9.5) and the popliteus was a mean distance of 8.2 (range 1.7-12.5) from the physis. ITB insertion: The ITB insertion at Gerdy's tubercle had an average footprint measuring 28.2 mm² (range 10.3-58.4) and the ITB centre lay proximal to the physis in 6 specimens (mean age 4.2 years, median 2.5 years) and distal in 3 specimens (mean age 1.5 years, median 4 months). Mean distance from the footprint centre to the physis was 1.6 mm proximal (range 7.1 proximal - 2.2 distal).

CONCLUSION

This study describes relative and quantitative positions of the femoral LCL and popliteus origins and tibial ITB attachment and their respective physeal relationships. Knowledge of paediatric anterolateral knee anatomy will help guide essential future research and procedures providing extra-articular anterolateral rotatory stabilisation and may help reduce iatrogenic physeal injury risk.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A (descriptive anatomic study).

Preoperative quantitative pivot shift does not correlate with in vivo kinematics following ACL reconstruction with or without lateral extraarticular tenodesis

PURPOSE

Quantitative pivot shift (QPS) testing using PIVOT technology can detect high- and low-grade rotatory knee instability following anterior cruciate ligament injury or reconstruction (ACLR). The aim of this project was to determine if preoperative QPS correlates with postoperative knee kinematics in the operative and contralateral, healthy extremity following ACLR with or without lateral extraarticular tenodesis (LET) using a highly precise in vivo analysis system. A positive correlation between preoperative QPS and postoperative tibial translation and rotation following ACLR with or without LET in the operative and healthy, contralateral extremity was hypothesized.

METHODS

Twenty patients with ACL injury and high-grade rotatory knee instability were randomized to undergo anatomic ACLR with or without LET as part of a prospective randomized trial. At 6 and 12 months postoperatively, in vivo kinematic data were collected using dynamic biplanar radiography superimposed with high-resolution computed tomography scans of patients' knees during downhill running. Total anterior-posterior (AP) tibial translation and internal-external tibial rotation were measured during the gait cycle. Spearman's rho was calculated for preoperative QPS and postoperative kinematics.

RESULTS

In the contralateral, healthy extremity, a significant positive correlation was seen between preoperative QPS and total AP tibial translation at 12 months postoperatively (r_s = 0.6, p < 0.05). There were no additional significant correlations observed between preoperative QPS and postoperative knee kinematics at 6 and 12 months postoperatively in the operative and contralateral, healthy extremity for combined isolated ACLR and ACLR with LET patients as well as isolated ACLR patients or ACLR with LET patients analyzed separately.

DISCUSSION

The main finding of this study was that there was a significant positive correlation between preoperative QPS and total AP tibial translation at 12 months postoperatively in the contralateral, healthy extremity. There were no significant correlations between preoperative QPS and postoperative in vivo kinematics at 6 and 12 months following ACLR with or without LET. This suggests that QPS as measured with PIVOT technology does correlate with healthy in vivo knee kinematics, but QPS does not correlate with in vivo kinematics following ACLR with or without LET.

Higher return to pre-injury type of sports after revision anterior ligament reconstruction with lateral extra-articular tenodesis compared to without lateral extra-articular tenodesis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the rate of return to pre-injury type of sports (RTS type) in patients after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) compared to patients after revision ACLR without LET.

METHODS

Seventy-eight patients who underwent revision ACLR with an autologous ipsilateral bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft with and without LET were included at least one year after surgery (mean follow-up: 43.9, SD: 29.2 months). All patients filled in a questionnaire about RTS type, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective form (IKDC_subjective), and the Tegner activity score.

RESULTS

The RTS type for revision ACLR with LET was 22 of 42 (52%), whereas 11 of 36 (31%) of the patients who underwent revision ACLR without LET returned to the pre-injury type of sport (p = 0.05). No significant differences were found in KOOS subscores, IKDC_subjective, and Tegner activity scores.

CONCLUSION

An additional LET increases the rate of RTS type after revision ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Modified Lemaire tenodesis reduces anterior cruciate ligament graft forces during internal tibial torque loading

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to directly measure graft forces of an anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and a lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) using the modified Lemaire technique in combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficient and anterolateral rotatory instable knees and to analyse the changes in knee joint motion resulting from combined ACLR + LET.

METHODS

On a knee joint test bench, six fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens were tested at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of knee flexion in the following states: 1) intact; 2) with resected ACL; 3) with resected ACL combined with anterolateral rotatory instability; 4) with an isolated ACLR; and 5) with combined ACLR + LET. The specimens were examined under various external loads: 1) unloaded; 2) with an anterior tibial translation force (ATF) of 98 N; 3) with an internal tibial torque (IT) of 5 Nm; and 4) with a combined internal tibial torque of 5 Nm and an anterior tibial translation force of 98 N (IT + ATF). The graft forces of the ACLR and LET were recorded by load cells incorporated into custom devices, which were screwed into the femoral tunnels. Motion of the knee joint was analysed using a 3D camera system.

RESULTS

During IT and IT + ATF, the addition of a LET reduced the ACLR graft forces up to 61% between 0° and 60° of flexion (P = 0.028). During IT + ATF, the LET graft forces reached 112 N. ACLR alone did not restore native internal tibial rotation after combined ACL deficiency and anterolateral rotatory instability. Combined ACLR + LET was able to restore native internal tibial rotation values for 0°, 60° and 90° of knee flexion with decreased internal tibial rotation at 30° of flexion.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrates that the addition of a LET decreases the forces seen by the ACLR graft and reduces residual rotational laxity after isolated ACLR during internal tibial torque loading. Due to load sharing, a LET could support the ACLR graft and perhaps be the reason for reduced repeat rupture rates seen in clinical studies. Care must be taken not to limit the internal tibial rotation when performing a LET.

Combined lateral extra-articular tenodesis and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: risk of osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) procedure, combined with an intra-articular reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), is used to reduce rotational laxity and the risk of graft failure. However, concern of overtightening of the lateral compartment and subsequent osteoarthritis remains. The aim of this study is to evaluate the degenerative changes in the lateral compartment and to compare the clinical and radiographical results between two LET techniques.

METHODS

Eighty-three patients (86 knees) were retrospectively reviewed at a mean of 67.7 months (range 49-85 months). Forty-two knees had an ACL reconstruction combined with a LET procedure according to the modified Lemaire technique and 44 knees according to the modified Coker-Arnold technique. IKDC, Lysholm, Tegner and VAS scores were used. Osteoarthritis was radiographically evaluated by the Kellgren-Lawrence classification.

RESULTS

There were 12 patients (28.6%) in the modified Lemaire subgroup and 13 patients (29.5%) in the modified Coker-Arnold subgroup that had doubtful or mild radiologic signs of osteoarthritis. No patients had moderate or severe signs at final follow-up. There was no significant difference in radiological signs of osteoarthritis. In the modified Lemaire subgroup, we report a mean IKDC of 86.31 (± 13.794), a mean Lysholm of 87.83 (± 12.802) and a mean Tegner of 5.38 (± 2.556). In the modified Coker-Arnold subgroup, a mean IKDC of 87.27 (± 11.653), a mean Lysholm of 91.89 (± 8.035) and a mean Tegner of 5.16 (± 2.420) were reported. There were no statistical significant differences between both techniques. In eight patients, a complication was identified, 3 of which had a failure of the ACL reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

The chosen LET-technique seems to have minimal effect on both the clinical and the radiographic results. The LET is a safe procedure, and it does not increase the risk of osteoarthritis in the lateral compartment.

The effect of lateral extra-articular tenodesis on in vivo cartilage contact in combined anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) may confer improved rotational stability after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Little is known about how LET affects in vivo cartilage contact after ACLR. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of LET in combination with ACLR (ACLR + LET) on in vivo cartilage contact kinematics compared to isolated ACLR (ACLR) during downhill running. It was hypothesised that cartilage contact area in the lateral compartment would be larger in ACLR + LET compared with ACLR, and that the anterior-posterior (A-P) position of the contact center on the lateral tibia would be more anterior after ACLR + LET than after ACLR.

METHODS

Twenty patients were randomly assigned into ACLR + LET or ACLR during surgery (ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02913404). At 6 months and 12 months after surgery, participants were imaged during downhill running using biplane radiography. Tibiofemoral motion was tracked using a validated registration process. Patient-specific cartilage models, obtained from 3 T MRI, were registered to track bone models and used to calculate the dynamic cartilage contact area and center of cartilage contact in both the medial and lateral tibiofemoral compartments, respectively. The side-to-side differences (SSD) were compared between groups using a Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

At 6 months after surgery, the SSD in A-P cartilage contact center in ACLR + LET (3.9 ± 2.6 mm, 4.4 ± 3.1 mm) was larger than in ACLR (1.2 ± 1.6 mm, 1.5 ± 2.0 mm) at 10% and 20% of the gait cycle, respectively (p < 0.01, p < 0.05). There was no difference in the SSD in cartilage contact center at 12 months after surgery. There was no difference in SSD of cartilage contact area in the medial and lateral compartments at both 6 and 12 months after surgery. There were no adverse events during the trial.

CONCLUSION

LET in combination with ACLR may affect the cartilage contact center during downhill running in the early post-operation phase, but this effect is lost in the longer term. This suggests that healing and neuromuscular adaptation occur over time and may also indicate a dampening of the effect of LET over time. (337 /350 words) LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Quadriceps tendon autograft is becoming increasingly popular in revision ACL reconstruction

PURPOSE

To evaluate trends in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R), with emphasis on intra-articular findings, grafts, and concurrent procedures. It was hypothesized that revision ACL-Rs over time show a trend toward increased complexity with increased use of autografts over allografts.

METHODS

This was a two-center retrospective study including patients undergoing revision ACL-R between 2010 and 2020. Demographic and surgical data including intra-articular findings and concurrent procedures were collected and compared for the time periods 2010-2014 and 2015-2020. All collected variables were compared between three pre-defined age groups (< 20 years, 20-30 years, > 30 years), right and left knees, and males and females. A time series analysis was performed to assess trends in revision ACL-R.

RESULTS

This study included 260 patients with a mean age of 26.2 ± 9.4 years at the time of the most recent revision ACL-R, representing the first, second, third, and fourth revision ACL-R for 214 (82%), 35 (14%), 10 (4%), and 1 (< 1%) patients, respectively. Patients age > 30 years showed a significantly longer mean time from primary ACL-R to most recent revision ACL-R (11.1 years), compared to patients age < 20 years (2.2 years, p < 0.001) and age 20-30 years (5.5 years, p < 0.05). Quadriceps tendon autograft was used significantly more often in 2015-2020 compared to 2010-2014 (49% vs. 18%, p < 0.001). A high rate of concurrently performed procedures including meniscal repairs (45%), lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET; 31%), osteotomies (13%), and meniscal allograft transplantations (11%) was shown. Concurrent LET was associated with intact cartilage and severely abnormal preoperative knee laxity and showed a statistically significant and linear increase over time (p < 0.05). Intact cartilage (41%, p < 0.05), concurrent medial meniscal repairs (39%, p < 0.05), and LET (35%, non-significant) were most frequently observed in patients aged < 20 years.

CONCLUSION

Quadriceps tendon autograft and concurrent LET are becoming increasingly popular in revision ACL-R. Intact cartilage and severely abnormal preoperative knee laxity represent indications for LET in revision ACL-R. The high rate of concurrent procedures observed demonstrates the high surgical demands of revision ACL-R.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

There are differences in knee stability based on lateral extra-articular augmentation technique alongside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

The purpose of the current study is to systematically review and network meta-analyze the current evidence in the literature to ascertain if there is a superior lateral extra-articular augmentation technique in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACL.R) with respect to knee stability, re-rupture rates and functional outcomes.

METHODS

The literature search was performed based on the PRISMA guidelines. Cohort studies comparing ACL.R to ACL.R + lateral extra-articular augmentation were included. Lateral extra-articular techniques included were anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALL.R), Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire, Losee, Maraccaci, and McIntosh. Clinical outcomes were compared between ACL.R alone and the different lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques using a frequentist approach to network meta-analysis, with statistical analysis performed using R. The treatment options were ranked using the P-Score.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies with a total of 2990 patients were included. ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold technique had the highest P-Score for ACL re-ruptures and residual pivot-shift. ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire, and ALL.R all significantly reduced the rate of ACL re-rupture, and residual pivot-shift, compared to ACL.R alone. There was no significant difference between any of the lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques and ACL.R alone. ALL.R had the highest P-Score for return to play, and return to play at pre-injury level.

CONCLUSION

This study established that ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire and ALL.R resulted in significantly lower ipsilateral ACL re-ruptures, as well as reduced pivot-shift, compared to ACL.R alone. Whereas, the other lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques did not reduce pivot-shift and re-rupture. Additionally, functional outcomes and return to play were comparable between those who underwent ACL.R and lateral extra-articular augmentation and ACL.R alone.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Clinical outcomes of contemporary lateral augmentation techniques in primary ACL reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this investigation was to systematically review the contemporary literature to determine if a lateral augmentation (LA) added to an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR) provides better clinical and patient reported outcomes compared to an isolated ACLR.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria. Two authors independently conducted an electronic search using MEDLINE® and Embase® on February 6^th, 2021 for level I-III randomized controlled trials (RCT) and prospective cohort studies without randomization, published after 2012 and with a minimum of two year follow-up. Publications were included when they reported on the objective knee stability examination, patient reported outcome scores, return to sports or graft rupture rate of any type of primary, isolated ACLR compared to ACLR combined with any type of LA.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies that reported on a combined total of 1892 unique patients were eligible for data extraction, including five RCTs and six prospective cohort studies. In 6 studies, an Anterolateral Ligament reconstruction (ALLR) was the LA of choice, while the 5 other publications used different types of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis (LET). A significant reduction in graft ruptures was found in patients treated with ACLR + LA (3%) compared to isolated ACLR (12%). Rotational laxity was significantly higher in isolated ACLR (14%) compared to ACLR + LA (6%). Addition of a LA reduced anterior translation when assessed via instrumented laxity testing. No significant difference was found in the patient reported outcome scores (IKDC and Tegner) between both patient groups, except for the Lysholm Score which was significant in favour of the ACLR + LA group.

CONCLUSION

Combination of a primary ACLR with a LA can significantly reduce the risk of graft rupture and provide better rotatory stability, without jeopardizing patient reported outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Systematic Review of Level I, II and III studies.

Comparative clinical outcomes of anterolateral ligament reconstruction versus lateral extra-articular tenodesis in combination with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anterolateral augmentation procedures can be divided into traditional lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and modern anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction. Nevertheless, no studies have compared the clinical results between LET and ALL reconstruction, when combined with intra-articular ACL reconstruction. This study was therefore designed to compare the clinical results, including the anterior translation, rotational laxity, and patient-reported outcomes, in a group of patients who underwent ACL reconstruction combined with LET or ALL reconstruction.

METHODS

All studies systematically searched until March 2018 without any language restriction that reported the results of a lateral extra-articular stabilization procedure using either LET or ALL reconstruction methods combined with ACL reconstruction were evaluated. Two reviewers independently recorded data from each study, including the sample size, improvement in Lysholm score, and the number of patients with each grade of knee laxity using Lachman and pivot shift tests.

RESULTS

The pooled results of ten studies showed that the postoperative proportion of knees with grade 2 or 3 on the Lachman test was significantly higher following LET compared with ALL reconstruction in combination with ACL reconstruction (10.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.6-17.1% vs. 1.5%, 95% CI 0.5-4.5%; p = 0.001). However, the pooled results of 12 studies showed that the proportion of knees that belonged to grade 2 or 3 on the pivot shift test, indicating poor rotational stability, was similar between these two techniques (4.9%, 95% CI 2.0-11.5% vs. 2.3%, 95% CI 1.1-4.5%; p = 0.101). The pooled improvements in Lysholm scores in these two groups were also similar (32.3, 95% CI 26.8-37.9 vs. 25.7, 95% CI 16.7-34.7, p = 0.218).

CONCLUSION

LET could lead to worse anterior instability than with ALL reconstruction when these two approaches were combined with single-bundle ACL reconstruction. However, rotational stability and patient-reported outcomes were similar between the techniques.

ACL reconstruction combined with lateral monoloop tenodesis can restore intact knee laxity

PURPOSE

An anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is often combined with injury to the lateral extra-articular structures, which may cause a combined anterior and rotational laxity. It was hypothesised that addition of a 'monoloop' lateral extra-articular tenodesis (mLET) to an ACL reconstruction would restore anteroposterior, internal rotation and pivot-shift laxities better than isolated ACL reconstruction in combined injuries.

METHOD

Twelve cadaveric knees were tested, using an optical tracking system to record the kinematics through 0°-100° of knee flexion with no load, anterior and posterior translational forces (90 N), internal and external rotational torques (5 Nm), and a combination of an anterior translational (90 N) plus internal rotational load (5 Nm). They were tested intact, after sectioning the ACL, sectioning anterolateral ligament (ALL), iliotibial band (ITB) graft harvest, releasing deep ITB fibres, hamstrings tendon ACL reconstruction, mLET combined with ACL reconstruction, and isolated mLET. Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA compared laxity data across knee states and flexion angles. When differences were found, paired t tests with Bonferroni correction were performed.

RESULTS

In the ACL-deficient knee, cutting the ALL significantly increased anterior laxity only at 20°-30°, and only significantly increased internal rotation at 50°. Additional deep ITB release significantly increased anterior laxity at 40°-90° and caused a large increase of internal rotation at 20°-100°. Isolated ACL reconstruction restored anterior drawer, but significant differences remained in internal rotation at 30°-100°. After adding an mLET there were no remaining differences with anterior translation or internal rotation compared to the intact knee. With the combined injury, isolated mLET allowed abnormal anterior translation and rotation to persist.

CONCLUSIONS

Cutting the deep fibres of the ITB caused large increases in tibial internal rotation laxity across the range of knee flexion, while cutting the ALL alone did not. With ACL deficiency combined with anterolateral deficiency, ACL reconstruction alone was insufficient to restore native knee rotational laxity. However, combining a 'monoloop' lateral extra-articular tenodesis with ACL reconstruction did restore native knee laxity.

Lateral extra-articular tenodesis with ACL reconstruction demonstrates better patient-reported outcomes compared to ACL reconstruction alone at 2 years minimum follow-up

PURPOSE

The role for extra-articular procedures in addition to ACL reconstruction to restore rotational stability is debated. We use lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LEAT) for patients that meet criteria. Our null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between two groups of patients that were treated with ACL reconstruction alone or ACL reconstruction with LEAT according to criteria.

METHODS

A prospectively collected database of patients that were treated primarily according to the presence of a high-grade pivot shift with LEAT at the time of ACL reconstruction was propensity-matched with a group of patients that underwent ACL reconstruction alone. Minimum follow-up was 2 years. Stratified variable analysis of the groups was also performed.

RESULTS

There were 218 and 55 patients in the ACL reconstruction group and ACL reconstruction with LEAT group, respectively. There were 125 patients and 46 patients after propensity matching with a median follow-up of 52 months and 27 months, respectively. Post-operative Lysholm score (P = 0.005), Tegner activity index (P = 0.003) and time to return to sport (P < 0.001) favoured ACL reconstruction with LEAT compared to ACL reconstruction alone. Sports with frequent change of direction maneuvers and higher rates of ACL injury (rugby, soccer, skiing) favoured ACL reconstruction with LEAT versus ACL reconstruction alone (P = 0.001). No significant difference in re-operation rate or type of surgery was found between the two surgical groups after propensity matching but 13 patients in the ACL reconstruction-only group re-injured their ACL, 8 of whom required supplementary LEAT at the time of revision surgery.

CONCLUSION

Patient-reported outcomes and return to multi-directional sports after ACL reconstruction favour LEAT at the time of ACL reconstruction when narrow inclusion criteria are applied.

Effects of different femoral tunnel positions on tension changes in anterolateral ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

Several kinds of anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstructions to augment intra-articular anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction to better control anterolateral rotational instability (ALRI) have been reported. However, the optimal femoral attachment site for ALL reconstruction is still unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of different femoral attachment sites on the tension changes through knee motions in different situations in order to determine a recommended femoral attachment site for ALL reconstruction.

METHODS

Six fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were included. ALL reconstructions were performed with three different femoral attachment sites (F1: 2 mm anterior and 2 mm distal to the lateral epicondyle, F2: 4 mm posterior and 8 mm proximal to the lateral epicondyle and F3: position for the lateral extra-articular tenodesis). The graft tension changes were measured by a graft tensioning system during knee flexion-extension and manual maximum internal/external tibial rotation in the following situations: (1) intact, (2) ALL cut, (3) ALL and ACL cut and (4) ALL cut and ACL reconstructed. Effects of the different femoral attachment sites, the route superficial or deep to the LCL, and the situations of (1) to (4) were calculated via repeated-measures analysis of variance.

RESULTS

The tension of F1 was higher in flexion and lower in extension, whereas the tension of F2 and F3 was higher in extension and lower in flexion. F2 showed the smallest tension change. Situations of (1) to (4) did not affect tension changes. The graft tension became higher with internal rotation and lower with external rotation regardless of femoral attachment sites or situations.

CONCLUSION

With F2-4 mm posterior and 8 mm proximal to the lateral epicondyle-the reconstructed ALL had the least tension change with only a slight increase in tension as the knee extended. This result indicates that F2 is recommended for ALL reconstruction to better control ALRI, which will help determine the optimal femoral tunnel position for ALL reconstruction.