scholarly journals Arthroscopic Primary Repair of Proximal Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears: No Deterioration at Mid-Term Follow-Up

Author(s):  
Jelle van der List ◽  
Gregory DiFelice
Author(s):  
Graeme P. Hopper ◽  
Joanna M. S. Aithie ◽  
Joanne M. Jenkins ◽  
William T. Wilson ◽  
Gordon M. Mackay

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (7_suppl5) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0029
Author(s):  
Jelle P. van der List ◽  
Anne Jonkergouw ◽  
Gregory S. DiFelice

Objectives: To compare the failure and reoperation rates of arthroscopic primary repair versus reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Methods: This study retrospectively reviewed all patients with ACL injury operatively treated between April 2008 and May 2016 by one surgeon. All patients with proximal tears were treated with primary repair using suture anchors, or otherwise underwent standard reconstruction. Patients were included if minimum two-year follow-up was present, and were excluded for multiligamentous injuries. Charts were reviewed and patients were contacted to assess failure (instability, graft rupture or revision), reoperation (other than revision), complications and contralateral failure. Results: 154 patients were included of which 56 underwent primary repair (36.4%). Mean age was 30 years (range 14-57), 70% was male and mean follow-up was 3 years (range 2-9). Patients undergoing ACL reconstruction were younger (28 vs. 33, p=0.002) and were more often male (77% vs. 59%, p=0.02). Failure rates were lower following primary repair (10.7%) than ACL reconstruction (12.2%) but this was not statistically significant (p=0.776). Also, no clinical relevant or statistical significant differences were found between repair and reconstruction in reoperations (7.1% each group), complications (1.8% vs. 3.1%, respectively) and contralateral failures (3.6% vs. 4.1%, respectively) (all p>0.99). With revision surgery, no complications were noted following primary repair revision (primary reconstruction; 0%) but 25% of revision reconstructions failed and 1 needed reoperation (8%). Conclusion: This study is the first study to compare the failure and reoperation rates following arthroscopic primary repair versus reconstruction in a large cohort of patients. With the treatment algorithm of primary repair for proximal avulsion tears and reconstruction of midsubstance tears, equivalent outcomes were noted between both treatments. Arthroscopic primary repair is a safe and good treatment for ACL injuries and has similar failure and reoperation rates when compared to the gold standard of ACL reconstruction.


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 ◽  
...  

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document