scholarly journals Patient-Reported Outcomes After Multiple-Revision ACL Reconstruction: Good but Not Great

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (5) ◽  
pp. e539-e546
Author(s):  
Ian D. Engler ◽  
Matthew J. Salzler ◽  
Andrew J. Wall ◽  
William R. Johnson ◽  
Amun Makani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Patient Reported

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 Lower Failure Rates and Improved Patient Outcome Due to Reconstruction of the MCL and Revision ACL Reconstruction in Chronic Medial Knee Instability

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 232596712198931
Author(s):  
Lena Alm ◽  
Tobias Claus Drenck ◽  
Jannik Frings ◽  
Matthias Krause ◽  
Alexander Korthaus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Lysholm Score ◽  
Knee Instability ◽  
Failure Rates ◽  
Medial Knee ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Risk Of Failure ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Reconstruction Group

Background: Concomitant lesion of the medial collateral ligament (MCL) is associated with a greater risk of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft failure. Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare two medial stabilization techniques in patients with revision ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and concomitant chronic medial knee instability. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: In a retrospective study, we included 53 patients with revision ACLR and chronic grade 2 medial knee instability to compare medial surgical techniques (MCL reconstruction [n = 17] vs repair [n = 36]). Postoperative failure of the revision ACLR (primary aim) was defined as side-to-side difference in Rolimeter testing ≥5 mm or pivot-shift grade ≥2. Clinical parameters and postoperative functional scores (secondary aim) were evaluated with a mean ± SD follow-up of 28.8 ± 9 months (range, 24-69 months). Results: Revision ACLR was performed in 53 patients with additional grade 2 medial instability (men, n = 33; women, n = 20; mean age, 31.3 ± 12 years). Failure occurred in 5.9% (n = 1) in the MCL reconstruction group, whereas 36.1% (n = 13) of patients with MCL repair showed a failed revision ACLR ( P = .02). In the postoperative assessment, the anterior side-to-side difference in Rolimeter testing was significantly reduced (1.5 ± 1.9 mm vs 2.9 ± 2.3 mm; P = .037), and medial knee instability occurred significantly less (18% vs 50%; P = .025) in the MCL reconstruction group than in the MCL repair group. In the logistic regression, patients showed a 9-times elevated risk of failure when an MCL repair was performed ( P = .043). Patient-reported outcomes were increased in the MCL reconstruction group as compared with MCL repair, but only the Lysholm score showed a significant difference (Tegner, 5.6 ± 1.9 vs 5.3 ± 1.6; International Knee Documentation Committee, 80.3 ± 16.6 vs 73.6 ± 16.4; Lysholm, 82.9 ± 13.6 vs 75.1 ± 21.1 [ P = .047]). Conclusion: MCL reconstruction led to lower failure rates in patients with combined revision ACLR and chronic medial instability as compared with MCL repair. MCL reconstruction was superior to MCL repair, as lower postoperative anterior instability, an increased Lysholm score, and less medial instability were present after revision ACLR. MCL repair was associated with a 9-times greater risk of failure.

scholarly journals Poor Associations Between Radiographic Tibiofemoral Osteoarthritis and Patient-Reported Outcomes at 16 Years After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. 232596712095117
Author(s):  
Fredrik Identeg ◽  
Eric Hamrin Senorski ◽  
Eleonor Svantesson ◽  
Kristian Samuelsson ◽  
Ninni Sernert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Ikdc Score ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Grade 3

Background: Radiographic tibiofemoral (TF) osteoarthritis (OA) is common in patients after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction at long-term follow-up. The association between radiographic OA and patient-reported outcomes has not been thoroughly investigated. Purpose: To determine the association between radiographic TF OA and patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores at 16 years after ACL reconstruction. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: This study was based on 2 randomized controlled studies comprising 193 patients who underwent unilateral ACL reconstruction. A long-term follow-up was carried out at 16.4 ± 1.7 years after surgery and included a radiographic examination of the knee and recording of PROM scores. Correlation analyses were performed between radiographic OA (Kellgren-Lawrence [K-L], Ahlbäck, and cumulative Fairbank grades) and the PROMs of the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form, Lysholm score, and Tegner activity scale. A linear univariable regression model was used to assess how the IKDC score differed with each grade of radiographic OA. Results: Of 193 patients at baseline, 147 attended the long-term follow-up. At long-term follow-up, 44.2% of the patients had a K-L grade of ≥2 in the injured leg, compared with 6.8% in the uninjured leg. The mean IKDC score at follow-up was 71.2 ± 19.9. Higher grades of radiographic OA were significantly correlated with lower IKDC and Lysholm scores ( r = –0.36 to –0.22). Patients with a K-L grade of 3 to 4 had significantly lower IKDC scores compared with patients without radiographic OA (K-L grade 0-1). Adjusted beta values were –15.7 (95% CI, –27.5 to –4.0; P = .0093; R 2 = 0.09) for K-L grade 3 and –25.2 (95% CI, –41.7 to –8.6; P = .0033; R 2 = 0.09) for K-L grade 4. Conclusion: There was a poor but significant correlation between radiographic TF OA and more knee-related limitations, as measured by the IKDC form and the Lysholm score. Patients with high grades of radiographic TF OA (K-L grade 3-4) had a statistically significant decrease in IKDC scores compared with patients without radiographic TF OA at 16 years after ACL reconstruction. No associations were found between radiographic TF OA and the Tegner activity level.

scholarly journals Reoperation and Failure Rate at Six Years Following Revision ACL Reconstruction: A MARS Cohort Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (7_suppl5) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0029
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Reoperation Rate ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome ◽  
Young Cohort ◽  
Revision Procedure ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Surgical Data

Objectives: Revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains a challenge for orthopaedic surgeons, as results are persistently inferior to those of primary reconstructions. There is very limited data regarding outcomes at 6 years following revision ACL surgery. The purpose of this study was to report the rate of reoperation, further revision, and conversion to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in a large cohort of revision ACL reconstructions Methods: Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstructions were identified and prospectively enrolled between 2006 and 2011. Data collected included baseline demographics, intraoperative surgical technique, and a series of validated patient-reported outcome instruments. Patients were followed up by questionnaire and telephone at 6 years following index revision surgery and asked if they had undergone any further surgical procedures to either knee. If a patient reported having undergone subsequent surgery, operative reports detailing the subsequent procedure(s) were obtained and categorized. Results: Six-year follow-up subsequent surgical data was available for 951/1234 patients (77%). In this available cohort, 556 (58%) were male, mean age was 28 years (range 12-61 years) and mean BMI was 26.1 (range 17.1-47.5). Allograft was used in 510 (54%) cases, BTB autograft in 234 (25%), soft tissue autograft in 174 (18%) and other grafts were used in the remaining 33 (3%). Their index surgery was their first revision ACL reconstruction in 822 (86.4%), in 108 (11.4%) it was their second, and in 21 (2.2%) it was their third or greater. This revision procedure was a mean of 5.7 years (range 0.1-26 years) from their prior ACL reconstruction. At six years following the index revision procedure, 16.2% of the cohort underwent at least 1 subsequent surgical procedure on their index knee. Of the reoperations, 29% were meniscal procedures (71% meniscectomy, 18% repair), 21% were articular cartilage procedures (79% chondroplasty, 15% microfracture, 3% OATS, 3% ACI), 11% were for arthrofibrosis, 9% for hardware removal, and 6% were for a subsequent revision ACL reconstruction. Surprisingly, only 5% reported having undergone a subsequent TKA on their ipsilateral knee. During this same 6-year follow-up period, 6% of the cohort (n=53 patients) underwent a subsequent surgery on their contralateral knee, of which 36 were ACL reconstructions. Conclusion: Our data shows that there is a reoperation rate of greater than 15% following ACL revision, which is an important point of discussion between surgeons and their patients. Of particular interest is that there was a 6% rate of recurrent ACL failure and 5% rate of subsequent TKA in this young cohort 6 years following a revision ACL reconstruction.

scholarly journals Knee Kinematics Are Related to Patient-Reported Outcomes 6 Months After Anatomic ACL Reconstruction

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (7_suppl2) ◽  
pp. 2325967115S0003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jay Kalawadia ◽  
Eric Thorhauer ◽  
Fabio Vicente Arilla ◽  
Amir Ata Rahnemai Azar ◽  
Caiyan Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Knee Kinematics ◽  
Anatomic Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Patient Reported

scholarly journals Development of the KOOSglobal Platform to Measure Patient-Reported Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (12) ◽  
pp. 2915-2921 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cale A. Jacobs ◽  
Michael R. Peabody ◽  
Christian Lattermann ◽  
Jose F. Vega ◽  
Laura J. Huston ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Relative Efficiency ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) has demonstrated inferior psychometric properties when compared with the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form when assessing outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The KOOS, Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR) is a validated short-form instrument to assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after knee arthroplasty, and the purpose of this study was to determine if augmenting the KOOS, JR with additional KOOS items would allow for the creation of a short-form KOOS-based global knee score for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction, with psychometric properties similar to those of the IKDC. Hypothesis: An augmented version of the KOOS, JR could be created that would demonstrate convergent validity with the IKDC but avoid the ceiling effects and limitations previously noted with several of the KOOS subscales. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Based on preoperative and 2-year postoperative responses to the KOOS questionnaires from a sample of 1904 patients undergoing ACL reconstruction, an aggregate score combining the KOOS, JR and the 4 KOOS Quality of Life subscale questions, termed the KOOSglobal, was developed. Psychometric properties of the KOOSglobal were then compared with those of the IKDC subjective score. Convergent validity between the KOOSglobal and IKDC was assessed with a Spearman correlation (ρ). Responsiveness of the 2 instruments was assessed by calculating the pre- to postoperative effect size and relative efficiency. Finally, the presence of a preoperative floor or postoperative ceiling effect was defined with the threshold of 15% of patients reporting either the worst possible (0 for KOOSglobal and IKDC) or the best possible (100 for KOOSglobal and IKDC) scores, respectively. Results: The newly developed KOOSglobal was responsive after ACL reconstruction and demonstrated convergent validity with the IKDC. The KOOSglobal significantly correlated with the IKDC scores (ρ = 0.91, P < .001), explained 83% of the variability in IKDC scores, and was similarly responsive (relative efficiency = 0.63). While there was a higher rate of perfect postoperative scores with the KOOSglobal (213 of 1904, 11%) than with the IKDC (6%), the KOOSglobal was still below the 15% ceiling effect threshold. Conclusion: The large ceiling effects limit the ability to use several of the KOOS subscales with the younger, more active ACL population. However, by creating an aggregate score from the KOOS, JR and 4 KOOS Quality of Life subscale questions, the 11-item KOOSglobal offers a responsive PRO tool after ACL reconstruction that converges with the information captured with the IKDC. Also, by offering the ability to calculate multiple scores from a single questionnaire, the KOOSglobal may provide the orthopaedic community a single PRO platform to be used across knee-related subspecialties. Registration: NCT00478894 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

scholarly journals COMPARISON OF BONE-PATELLA TENDON-BONE (BTB) AND QUADRICEPS AUTOGRAFT FOR ACL RECONSTRUCTION IN PATIENTS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967120S0027
Author(s):  
Seth L. Sherman ◽  
Daniel W. Hogan ◽  
Derek W. Geeslin ◽  
Joseph M. Rund ◽  
M. Benjamin Burch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Patient Population ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Skeletal Maturity ◽  
Surgical Patient ◽  
Cartilage Restoration ◽  
Graft Choice ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Subjective Outcomes

Background: Graft choice for ACL reconstruction in patients under 18 years old remains controversial. BTB autograft has long been considered for young athletes who are at or near skeletal maturity. Quadriceps autograft has emerged as an alternative graft choice in the young patient population. However, there remains a paucity of comparative outcomes. Hypothesis/Purpose: Our purpose is to compare subjective outcomes and complications of ACL reconstruction in patients under 18 years old using either BTB or quadriceps autograft. Our hypothesis is that there will be no difference in subjective outcome or complication between groups. Methods: Following IRB approval, retrospective review of prospectively collected data identified consecutive cohorts of patients under 18 years old undergoing ACL reconstruction with either BTB or quadriceps autograft. Surgery was performed by a single sports fellowship trained surgeon between 2011-2019. Patients undergoing concomitant osteotomies, cartilage restoration, and other ligament reconstruction procedures were excluded. Pre- and post-surgical patient reported outcomes (PROs) including IKDC, KOOS, PROMIS, SANE, Tegner, and Marx were compared between groups. Complications requiring re-operation (i.e., infection, stiffness, reconstruction failure) were recorded. Results were analyzed statistically. Results: 71 patients met inclusion criteria. There were 41 BTB and 30 quadriceps autografts. Mean age was 16.5 years in the BTB group and 14.5 in the quadriceps group (p=0.0000006). 27 of 41 (66%) BTB and 13 of 30 (43%) quadriceps were female. There were no significant differences in PROs between groups. At minimum 6-month follow-up (range 6-25.7 months), patients in both quadriceps and BTB autograft cohorts reported statistically significant improvements in IKDC scores (31.10%, p=0.0009; 34.25%, p=0.00000008), all KOOS domains, SANE (41.80%, p=0.0000006; 42.42%, p=0.000000002), and Tegner scores (2.99%, p=0.0002; 3.35%, p=0.000004). Post-operative PROs were not significantly different between groups (p>0.05). Complications were low and not significant between groups. Both quadriceps and BTB autograft cohorts required 3 post-operative re-operations (10% and 7%, p=0.7), each group including 2 revision reconstructions (7% and 5%, p=0.8) and 1 procedure for stiffness (3% and 2%, p=0.8). Conclusion: For ACL reconstruction in patients under 18 years old, both BTB and quadriceps autografts demonstrated significant subjective improvements and low rates of complications requiring re-operation. Quadriceps autograft appears to be a safe and effective alternative to BTB autograft in this challenging patient population. [Table: see text][Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document