scholarly journals Return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (8) ◽  
pp. 2403-2414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean J. Meredith ◽  
◽  
Thomas Rauer ◽  
Terese L. Chmielewski ◽  
Christian Fink ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Return To Sport ◽  
Acl Injury ◽  
Ligament Injury ◽  
Consensus Group ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

scholarly journals Evidence too weak to guide surgical treatment decisions for anterior cruciate ligament injury: a systematic review of the risk of new meniscal tears after anterior cruciate ligament injury

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (9) ◽  
pp. 520-527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guri Ranum Ekås ◽  
Clare L Ardern ◽  
Hege Grindem ◽  
Lars Engebretsen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Injury ◽  
Ligament Injury ◽  
Meniscal Tears ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

ObjectiveTo investigate the risk of new meniscal tears after treatment for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, in children and adults with and without ACL reconstruction.DesignPrognosis systematic review (PROSPERO registration number CRD42016036788).MethodsWe searched Embase, Ovid Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PEDro and Google Scholar from inception to 3rd May 2018. Eligible articles included patients with ACL injury (diagnosis confirmed by MRI and/or diagnostic arthroscopy), reported the number of meniscal tears at the time of ACL injury diagnosis/start of treatment and reported the number of new meniscal tears that subsequently occurred. Articles with fewer than 20 patients at follow-up, and articles limited to ACL revision surgery or multi-ligament knee injuries were excluded. Two independent reviewers screened articles, assessed eligibility, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We judged the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group methodology.ResultsOf 75 studies included in the systematic review, 54 studies with 9624 patients and 501 new meniscal tears were appropriate for quantitative analysis. Heterogeneity precluded data pooling. The risk of new meniscal tears was 0%–21% when follow-up was <2 years, 0%–29% when follow-up was 2 to 5 years, 5%–52% when follow-up was 5 to 10 years and 4%–31% when follow-up was longer than 10 years. The proportion of studies with high risk of selection, misclassification and detection bias was 84%, 69% and 68%, respectively. Certainty of evidence was very low.ConclusionNew meniscal tears occurred in 0%–52% of patients between 4 months and 20 years (mean 4.9±4.4 years) following treatment for ACL injury. The certainty of evidence was too low to guide surgical treatment decisions. This review cannot conclude that the incidence of new meniscal tears is lower if ACL injury is treated with surgery compared with treatment with rehabilitation only.

scholarly journals Return to Sport After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. 232596712093082 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean J. Meredith ◽  
Thomas Rauer ◽  
Terese L. Chmielewski ◽  
Christian Fink ◽  
Theresa Diermeier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Return To Sport ◽  
Acl Injury ◽  
Consensus Group ◽  
Consensus Statements ◽  
Multidisciplinary Group ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Definition Of

Background: A precise and consistent definition of return to sport (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is lacking, and there is controversy surrounding the process of returning patients to sport and their previous activity level. Purpose: The aim of the Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group was to provide a clear definition of RTS after ACL injury and a description of the RTS continuum as well as provide clinical guidance on RTS testing and decision-making. Study Design: Consensus statement. Methods: An international, multidisciplinary group of ACL experts convened as part of a consensus meeting. Consensus statements were developed using a modified Delphi method. Literature review was performed to report the supporting evidence. Results: Key points include that RTS is characterized by achievement of the preinjury level of sport and involves a criteria-based progression from return to participation to RTS and, ultimately, return to performance. Purely time-based RTS decision-making should be abandoned. Progression occurs along an RTS continuum, with decision-making by a multidisciplinary group that incorporates objective physical examination data and validated and peer-reviewed RTS tests, which should involve functional assessment as well as psychological readiness. Consideration should be given to biological healing, contextual factors, and concomitant injuries. Conclusion: The resultant consensus statements and scientific rationale aim to inform the reader of the complex process of RTS after ACL injury that occurs along a dynamic continuum. Research is needed to determine the ideal RTS test battery, the best implementation of psychological readiness testing, and methods for the biological assessment of healing and recovery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document