scholarly journals Arthroscopic primary repair of proximal anterior cruciate ligament tears seems safe but higher level of evidence is needed: a systematic review and meta-analysis of recent literature

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (6) ◽  
pp. 1946-1957 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jelle P. van der List ◽  
Harmen D. Vermeijden ◽  
Inger N. Sierevelt ◽  
Gregory S. DiFelice ◽  
Arthur van Noort ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Primary Repair ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Outcome Scores ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Abstract Purpose To assess the outcomes of the various techniques of primary repair of proximal anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears in the recent literature using a systematic review with meta-analysis. Methods PRISMA guidelines were followed. All studies reporting outcomes of arthroscopic primary repair of proximal ACL tears using primary repair, repair with static (suture) augmentation and dynamic augmentation between January 2014 and July 2019 in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane were identified and included. Primary outcomes were failure rates and reoperation rates, and secondary outcomes were patient-reported outcome scores. Results A total of 13 studies and 1,101 patients (mean age 31 years, mean follow-up 2.1 years, 60% male) were included. Nearly all studies were retrospective studies without a control group and only one randomized study was identified. Grade of recommendation for primary repair was weak. There were 9 out of 74 failures following primary repair (10%), 6 out of 69 following repair with static augmentation (7%) and 106 out of 958 following dynamic augmentation (11%). Repair with dynamic augmentation had more reoperations (99; 10%), and more hardware removal (255; 29%) compared to the other procedures. All functional outcome scores were > 85% of maximum scores. Conclusions This systematic review with meta-analysis found that the different techniques of primary repair are safe with failure rates of 7–11%, no complications and functional outcome scores of > 85% of maximum scores. There was a high risk of bias and follow-up was short with 2.1 years. Prospective studies comparing the outcomes to ACL reconstruction with sufficient follow-up are needed prior to widespread implementation. Level of evidence IV.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Alone Versus With Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652110049
Author(s):  
James Randolph Onggo ◽  
Hari Krishnan Rasaratnam ◽  
Mithun Nambiar ◽  
Jason Derry Onggo ◽  
Vishal Pai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LEAT) aims to improve anterolateral stability of the injured knee during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) surgery. Inconclusive evidence surrounding the efficacy and safety of LEAT has propelled clinical interest and ongoing discussions. Purpose: To establish level 1 evidence by assessing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with minimum 2-year follow-up that directly compared ACLR with LEAT (LEAT group) and ACLR alone (non-LEAT group) in terms of clinical outcomes and complications. Study Design: Meta-analysis and systematic review; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: Meta-analysis was performed with a multidatabase search (Cochrane, EMBASE, OVID Medline, PubMed, and Web of Science) according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines on September 9, 2020. Data from published RCTs meeting inclusion criteria were extracted and analyzed with an inverse variance statistical model. Results: A total of 7 RCTs were included, consisting of 517 LEAT and 589 non-LEAT patients. Only autografts were used for ACLR and LEAT. A variety of LEAT techniques and autograft fixation methods were used. We found improved stability (residual positive pivot shift: risk ratio [RR], 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.88; P = .01) and better clinical outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] score: mean difference [MD], 2.31; 95% CI, 0.54-4.09; P = .01; and Lysholm score: MD, 2.71; 95% CI, 0.68-4.75; P = .009) in the LEAT than non-LEAT group. Graft rerupture rate was 3 times less likely (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.17-0.58; P < .001) in the LEAT group than the non-LEAT group. Conclusion: Good-quality evidence is available to support the efficacy of LEAT in improving anterolateral knee stability and reducing graft reruptures in primary ACLR. LEAT should be considered in patients with high risk factors. Although Lysholm and IKDC scores were statistically better in the LEAT group, these are unlikely to be clinically significant. Future studies should aim to identify patient populations that would best benefit from LEAT with ACLR.

Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Outcomes at a Minimum of 5-Year Follow-Up: A Systematic Review

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (03) ◽  
pp. 218-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lea Johnson ◽  
Robert Brophy ◽  
Ljiljana Bogunovic ◽  
Matthew Matava ◽  
Matthew Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

AbstractRevision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction typically has worse outcomes than primary reconstructions. Minimal long-term data exist regarding 5-year results. We chose to perform a systematic review to evaluate midterm (5-year) revision ACL reconstruction outcomes (patient-reported outcomes, reoperation, stability, arthritis) in comparison to primary ACL reconstructions at similar time points. Embase, Cochrane, and PubMed databases were queried, and four studies met the inclusion criteria. Two authors reviewed and performed data extraction. All were level 4 studies. Review of the studies demonstrated that results at 5 years are consistently worse than those noted in primary reconstructions for objective and patient-reported outcomes. Revision ACL reconstruction outcomes remain worse than primary reconstructions at midterm 5-year follow-up. The level of evidence is 4.

scholarly journals DOES THE USE OF A “HYBRID” GRAFT ALTER GRAFT FAILURE RATES OR OUTCOMES IN ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0013
Author(s):  
D’Anne Arthur ◽  
Natalie Khalil ◽  
Edward Ebramzadeh ◽  
Jennifer Beck
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Graft Failure ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Failure Rates ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Outcome Scores ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background The use of hamstring autografts less than 8.0mmin size to reconstruct anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries is associated with a higher risk of graft failure. A hybrid graft consisting of hamstring autograft tendons supplemented by allograft tendon to create a more robust graft has been proposed as an alternative treatment option in patients with small hamstring graft size. Multiple studies have shown inconsistent results for ACL reconstructions with hybrid grafts. This meta-analysis was designed to examine the rates of graft failure and clinical outcome measures for hybrid grafts in primary ACL reconstructions. Methods A search was performed of PubMed, MEDLINE and Google Scholar using the terms “Anterior Cruciate Ligament” OR “ACL” combined with “reconstruction” and “hybrid.” Two authors reviewed the papers, and outcomes were subdivided into autograft and hybrid graft. Chi Square with Yates Correction was used to determine the correlation between failure and type of graft for all patients, as well as for the subanalysis done for patients less than 18 years old and patients greater than 18 years old. Chi Square with Yates Correction and unpaired t-test were used to compare the demographic characteristics of the two groups. Unpaired t-test was used to evaluate for differences in subjective outcome scores. Results A total of 9 studies met the inclusion criteria. Only one study included a comparison of hybrid grafts with autografts and allografts, and as such, the allograft data was excluded from the analysis. Overall a total of 506 patients were treated with autografts with an average age of 26.7 +/- 10.8 years; and a total of 453 patients were treated with hybrid grafts with an average age of 28.33 +/-10.4 years. All patients had minimum follow up of 2 years with average follow up of 38.2 months. There was no significant difference in sex between the two groups (p = 0.07). There were significantly more females in the hybrid group compared to the autograft group (48% versus 42%, respectively p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in failure rates for the autograft or hybrid graft subgroups (p = 0.92). International Knee Documentation (IKDC) scores and Lysholm scores were significantly higher in the autograft group than the hybrid graft group (p = 0.02 and p < 0.01, respectively). There was no significant difference in Tegner Activity scores (p =0.68). On further subgroup analysis, there was no difference in failure rates for autografts vs hybrid grafts with subgroup analysis for both patients under 18 years of age and patients over 18 years of age (p = 0.78 and p = 0.24, respectively). Conclusions Supplementation of hamstring autograft with allograft tissue to form a “hybrid graft” did not alter the graft failure rate. But, the use of hybrid graft was associated with worse subjective outcome scores as measured by IKDC and Lysholm scores. Level of Evidence Level IV (A meta-analysis of Level II, III, and IV studies)

Sport-Specific Yearly Risk and Incidence of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears in High School Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PEDIATRICS ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 137 (Supplement 3) ◽  
pp. 561A-561A
Author(s):  
Alex L. Gornitzky ◽  
Ariana Lott ◽  
Joseph L. Yellin ◽  
Peter D. Fabricant ◽  
Theodore J. Ganley
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High School Athletes ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Tears

scholarly journals Satisfactory patient-reported outcomes at 5 years following primary repair with suture tape augmentation for proximal anterior cruciate ligament tears

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graeme P. Hopper ◽  
Joanna M. S. Aithie ◽  
Joanne M. Jenkins ◽  
William T. Wilson ◽  
Gordon M. Mackay
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Primary Repair ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Repair ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Activity Scale ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Suture Tape

Abstract Purpose An enhanced understanding of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) healing and advancements in arthroscopic instrumentation has resulted in a renewed interest in ACL repair. Augmentation of a ligament repair with suture tape reinforces the ligament and acts as a secondary stabilizer. This study assesses the 5-year patient-reported outcomes of primary repair with suture tape augmentation for proximal ACL tears. Methods Thirty-seven consecutive patients undergoing ACL repair with suture tape augmentation for an acute proximal rupture were prospectively followed up for a minimum of 5 years. Patients with midsubstance and distal ruptures, poor ACL tissue quality, retracted ACL remnants and multiligament injuries were excluded. Patient-reported outcome measures were collated using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS), Visual Analogue Pain Scale (VAS-pain), Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) and the Marx Activity Scale. Patients with a re-rupture were identified. Results Three patients were lost to follow-up leaving 34 patients in the final analysis (91.9%). The mean KOOS at 5 years was 88.5 (SD 13.8) which improved significantly from 48.7 (SD 18.3) preoperatively (p < 0.01). The VAS score improved from 2.3 (SD 1.7) to 1.0 (SD 1.5) and the VR-12 score improved from 35.9 (SD 10.3) to 52.4 (SD 5.9) at 5 years (p < 0.01). However, the Marx activity scale decreased from 12.4 (SD 3.4) pre-injury to 7.3 (SD 5.2) at 5 years (p = 0.02). Six patients had a re-rupture (17.6%) and have since undergone a conventional ACL reconstruction for their revision surgery with no issues since then. These patients were found to be younger and have higher initial Marx activity scores than the rest of the cohort (p < 0.05). Conclusion Primary repair with suture tape augmentation for proximal ACL tears demonstrates satisfactory outcomes in 28 patients (82.4%) at 5-year follow-up. Six patients sustained a re-rupture and have no ongoing problems following treatment with a conventional ACL reconstruction. These patients were significantly younger and had higher initial Marx activity scores. Level of evidence Level IV.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document