The Occurrence of Meniscal and Chondral Injury in Two-Stage Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Consecutive Case Series

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (03) ◽  
pp. 223-227
Author(s):  
Floris R. van Tol ◽  
Willem A. Kernkamp ◽  
Robert J. P. van der Wal ◽  
Jan-Willem A. Swen ◽  
Samuel K. Van de Velde ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Tear ◽  
Partial Meniscectomy ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Chondral Injury ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Two Stages

AbstractTwo-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is an effective way to revise suboptimal tunnel-placement allowing for proper graft fixation. However, prolonged increased laxity of the knee may increase the risk of meniscal or chondral injury. It was hypothesized that no additional meniscal or chondral lesions occur in between the two stages of the two-stage revision ACL reconstruction. In this retrospective study, 42 patients undergoing a two-stage revision ACL reconstruction were included. Surgical notes for both stages were screened for meniscal and chondral status, interventions to any concurrent injury, surgery dates, along with basic patient characteristics. In 4 of the 42 patients, a new meniscal tear occurred in between the two stages, of which three required partial meniscectomy during the second stage of the ACL revision. One patient experienced a new small degenerative tear that did not require intervention. Two out of the four menisci that were repaired during the first stage had failed and required partial meniscectomy. No significant difference was found in the time between the two stages with respect to the occurrence of meniscal tears. No significant differences in chondral status were found. In conclusion, approximately 10% of patients developed a new meniscal tear and no difference in macroscopic chondral injury was observed between the first and second stages.

scholarly journals EFFECT OF SKELETAL MATURITY ON INCIDENCE OF ASSOCIATED MENISCAL AND CHONDRAL INJURIES IN ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT INJURED KNEES

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967121S0010
Author(s):  
Brett Heldt ◽  
Elsayed Attia ◽  
Raymond Guo ◽  
Indranil Kushare ◽  
Theodore Shybut
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Medial Meniscus ◽  
Skeletal Maturity ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Meniscal Tear ◽  
Lateral Meniscus ◽  
Meniscus Tears ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Acute anterior cruciate ligament(ACL) rupture is associated with a significant incidence of concomitant meniscal and chondral injuries. However, to our knowledge, the incidence of these concomitant injuries in skeletally immature(SI) versus skeletally mature(SM) patients has not been directly compared. SI patients are a unique subset of ACL patients because surgical considerations are different, and subsequent re-tear rates are high. However, it is unclear if the rates and types of meniscal and chondral injuries differ. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare associated meniscal and chondral injury patterns between SI and SM patients under age 21, treated with ACL reconstruction for an acute ACL tear. We hypothesized that no significant differences would be seen. Methods: We performed a single-center retrospective review of primary ACL reconstructions performed from January 2012 to April 2020. Patients were stratified by skeletal maturity status based on a review of records and imaging. Demographic data was recorded, including age, sex, and BMI. Associated intra-articular meniscal injury, including laterality, location, configuration, and treatment were determined. Articular cartilage injury location, grade, and treatments were determined. Revision rates, non-ACL reoperation rates, and time to surgery were also compared between the two groups. Results: 785 SM and 208 SI patients met inclusion criteria. Mean BMI and mean age were significantly different between groups. Meniscal tear rates were significantly greater in SM versus SI patients in medial meniscus tears(P<.001), medial posterior horn tears(P=.001), medial longitudinal tears configuration(P=.007), lateral Radial configuration(P=.002), and lateral complex tears(P=.011). Medial repairs(P<.001) and lateral partial meniscectomies(P=.004) were more likely in the SM group. There was a significantly greater number of chondral injuries in the SM versus SI groups in the Lateral(p=.007) and medial compartments(P<.001). SM patients had a significantly increased number of outerbridge grade 1 and 2 in the Lateral(P<.001) and Medial Compartments(P=.013). ACL revisions(P=.019) and Non-ACL reoperations(P=.002) were significantly greater in the SI patients compared to SM. No other significant differences were noted. Conclusion: SM ACL injured patients have a significantly higher rate of medial meniscus tears and medial longitudinal configurations treated with repair, and a significantly higher rate of radial and/or complex lateral meniscus tears treated with partial meniscectomy compared to the SI group. We also found a significantly higher rate of both medial and lateral compartment chondral injuries, mainly grades 1 and 2, in SM compared to SI patients. Conversely, SI ACL reconstruction patients had higher revision and subsequent non-ACL surgery rates.

The 50 Most Cited Articles in the Indications, Risk Factors, Techniques, and Outcomes of ACL Revision Surgery

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hayley E. Ennis ◽  
Kevin Bondar ◽  
Johnathon McCormick ◽  
Clark Jia-Long Chen ◽  
Chester J. Donnally ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Ligament Injury ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Number Of Citations

AbstractThe rate of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) retear remains high and revision ACL reconstruction has worse outcomes compared with primaries. To make advances in this area, a strong understanding of influential research is necessary. One method for systematically evaluating the literature is by citation analysis. This article aims to establish and evaluate “classic” articles. With consideration of these articles, this article also aims to evaluate gaps in the field and determine where future research should be directed. The general approach for data collection and analysis consisted of planning objectives, employing a defined strategy, reviewing search results using a multistep and multiauthor approach with specific screening criteria, and analyzing data. The collective number of citations for all publications within the list was 5,203 with an average of 104 citations per publication. “Biomechanical Measures during Landing and Postural Stability Predict Second Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Return to Sport” by Paterno et al contained both the highest number of total citations and the highest number of citations per year, with 403 total citations and 43.9 citations per year. The most recurring level of evidence were level II (n = 18) and level III (n = 17). “Clinical Outcomes” was the most common article type (n = 20) followed by “Risk Factors” (n = 10). The American Journal of Sports Medicine had the highest recorded Cite Factor with over 50% of the articles (n = 27) published. The most productive authors included R.W. Wright (n = 6), S.D. Barber-Westin (n = 5), F.R. Noyes (n = 5), and K.P. Spindler (n = 5). Historically, influential studies have been published in the realms of clinical outcome and risk factor identification. It has been established that revision ACL reconstruction has worse outcomes and more high-level studies are needed. Additionally, prospective studies that apply the knowledge for current known risk factor mitigation are needed to determine if graft tear rates can be lowered.

Secondary Meniscal Tears in Patients With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Relationship Among Operative Management, Osteoarthritis, and Arthroplasty at 18-Year Mean Follow-up

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (7) ◽  
pp. 1583-1590 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michella H. Hagmeijer ◽  
Mario Hevesi ◽  
Vishal S. Desai ◽  
Thomas L. Sanders ◽  
Christopher L. Camp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Tear ◽  
Acl Injury ◽  
Nonoperative Treatment ◽  
Meniscal Tears ◽  
Acl Injuries ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is one of the most frequent orthopaedic injuries and reasons for time loss in sports and carries significant implications, including posttraumatic osteoarthritis (OA). Instability associated with ACL injury has been linked to the development of secondary meniscal tears (defined as tears that develop after the initial ACL injury). To date, no study has examined secondary meniscal tears after ACL injury and their effect on OA and arthroplasty risk. Purpose: To describe the rates and natural history of secondary meniscal tears after ACL injury and to determine the effect of meniscal tear treatment on the development of OA and conversion to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A geographic database of >500,000 patients was reviewed to identify patients with primary ACL injuries between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 2005. Information was collected with regard to ACL injury treatment, rates/characteristics of the secondary meniscal tears, and outcomes, including development of OA and conversion to TKA. Kaplan-Meier and adjusted multivariate survival analyses were performed to test for the effect of meniscal treatment on survivorship free of OA and TKA. Results: Of 1398 primary ACL injuries, the overall rate of secondary meniscal tears was 16%. Significantly lower rates of secondary meniscal tears were noted among patients undergoing acute ACL reconstruction within 6 months (7%) as compared with patients with delayed ACL reconstruction (33%, P < .01) and nonoperative ACL management (19%, P < .01). Of the 235 secondary meniscal tears identified (196 patients), 11.5% underwent repair, 73% partial meniscectomy, and 16% were treated nonoperatively. Tears were most often medial in location (77%) and complex in morphology (56% of medial tears, 54% of lateral tears). At the time of final follow-up, no patient undergoing repair of a secondary meniscal tear (0%) underwent TKA, as opposed to 10.9% undergoing meniscectomy and 6.1% receiving nonoperative treatment ( P = .28). Conclusion: Secondary meniscal tears after ACL injury are most common among patients undergoing delayed surgical or nonoperative treatment of their primary ACL injuries. Secondary tears often present as complex tears of the medial meniscus and result in high rates of partial meniscectomy.

Surgical Management of Simultaneous Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Patellar Tendon Ruptures: A Systematic Review

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (09) ◽  
pp. 875-883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Meheux ◽  
Robert Jack ◽  
Patrick McCulloch ◽  
David Lintner ◽  
Joshua Harris
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Activity Level ◽  
Two Stage ◽  
One Stage ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
The One

AbstractThis study performs a systematic review to determine (1) if a significant difference exists in return to preinjury activity level between one- and two-stage treatment of combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and patellar tendon (PT) tears; and (2) if a significant difference exists in the number of postoperative complications between the two differing surgical treatment approaches. A systematic review was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and registered on PROSPERO. MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, SCOPUS, and Sport Discus were searched for English language level I–IV evidence studies on either one- (simultaneous) or two-stage (sequential) surgical treatment of simultaneously sustained ipsilateral ACL and PT tears. The approach to initial evaluation, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes were qualitatively analyzed. Methodological quality assessment of all included studies was completed using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to assess quality of evidence and provide strength of recommendation. Statistical analyses were done using Fischer's exact test. Eleven articles (18 patients; 83% males; mean age, 31.1 ± 10.1 years; mean follow-up, 2.2 ± 1.7 years; and mean MINORS 7.8/16) were analyzed. Eight patients had a one-stage procedure (primary PT repair and ACL reconstruction), and 10 patients underwent a two-stage procedure (primary PT repair first followed by ACL reconstruction) with mean 28 ± 45.7 weeks (5 weeks–3 years) between surgeries. The rate for return to preinjury activity level after surgery was not significantly different between one- (88%) and two-stage (100%) (p = 0.444). There was a significantly higher complication rate (p = 0.023) in the one-stage (stiffness, instability, and patella baja) versus two-stage surgery (no complications). There was no significant difference in return to preinjury activity level between one- and two-stage PT repair and ACL reconstruction. However, the one-stage combined surgery had a significantly higher complication rate compared with two-stage surgery. The level of evidence is IV.

scholarly journals Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 504-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Wilde ◽  
Asheesh Bedi ◽  
David W. Altchek
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Knee Instability ◽  
Return To Play ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Pubmed Database ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Primary Acl Reconstruction

Context: Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is one of the most common surgical procedures, with more than 200,000 ACL tears occurring annually. Although primary ACL reconstruction is a successful operation, success rates still range from 75% to 97%. Consequently, several thousand revision ACL reconstructions are performed annually and are unfortunately associated with inferior clinical outcomes when compared with primary reconstructions. Evidence Acquisition: Data were obtained from peer-reviewed literature through a search of the PubMed database (1988-2013) as well as from textbook chapters and surgical technique papers. Study Design: Clinical review. Level of Evidence: Level 4. Results: The clinical outcomes after revision ACL reconstruction are largely based on level IV case series. Much of the existing literature is heterogenous with regard to patient populations, primary and revision surgical techniques, concomitant ligamentous injuries, and additional procedures performed at the time of the revision, which limits generalizability. Nevertheless, there is a general consensus that the outcomes for revision ACL reconstruction are inferior to primary reconstruction. Conclusion: Excellent results can be achieved with regard to graft stability, return to play, and functional knee instability but are generally inferior to primary ACL reconstruction. A staged approach with autograft reconstruction is recommended in any circumstance in which a single-stage approach results in suboptimal graft selection, tunnel position, graft fixation, or biological milieu for tendon-bone healing. Strength-of-Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT): Good results may still be achieved with regard to graft stability, return to play, and functional knee instability, but results are generally inferior to primary ACL reconstruction: Level B.

scholarly journals Meniscal Repair with Concurrent Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is ACL Graft Choice Predictive of Meniscal Repair Success?

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (7_suppl5) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0035
Author(s):  
Hytham S. Salem ◽  
Laura J. Huston ◽  
Alex Zajichek ◽  
Michelle Lora Wolcott ◽  
Eric C. McCarty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Tear ◽  
Meniscal Repair ◽  
Acl Graft ◽  
Baseline Activity ◽  
Graft Choice ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Objectives: The success rate of meniscal repair is known to increase with concurrent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, the influence of ACL graft choice has not been described. The current study examines the effect of ACL graft choice on the outcome of meniscal repair performed in conjunction with ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Methods: Patients who underwent meniscal repair with concurrent primary ACLR were identified from a longitudinal, prospective cohort. Patient demographics and subjective outcome measures including the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Marx activity rating scale were collected preoperatively. Arthroscopic assessment of meniscal tear characteristics and associated repair technique were recorded intraoperatively. Patients with subsequent repair failure, defined as any subsequent surgical procedure addressing the meniscus repaired at index surgery, were identified and operative notes were obtained in order to accurately classify pathology and treatment. A logistic regression model was built to assess the association of patient specific factors, ACL graft, baseline Marx activity level and meniscal tear laterality with the occurrence of repair failure at 6-year follow-up. Results: A total of 646 patients underwent ACLR with concurrent meniscal repair. Bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) and soft tissue (ST) autograft were used in 55.7% and 33.9% of cases, respectively, while allografts were utilized in the remaining cases. Table 1 summarizes the univariate analysis of each baseline variable. A total of 101 patients (15.6%) required subsequent surgery on the meniscus repaired at index surgery, including 89 meniscectomies (87 partial, 2 subtotal), 11 revision meniscal repairs, and 1 meniscus allograft transplantation. No statistically significant difference in meniscal repair failure rate was observed based on patient age, sex, BMI or smoking status. The odds of meniscal repair failure within 6 years of surgery for patients with only a lateral meniscal repair are 68% less than those with only a medial meniscal repair (CI: 41%, 83%; p<0.001). There is a statistically significant relationship between baseline Marx activity and the risk of subsequent meniscal repair, though it is nonlinear—patients with low or high baseline activity are at the highest risk of meniscal repair failure (CI: 1.05,1.31; p=0.004, Figure 1). The estimated odds of meniscal repair failure for BTB allograft, ST allograft, and ST autograft were 2.78 (CI: 0.84,9.19; p=0.09), 2.29 (CI: 0.97,5.45; p=0.06), and 1.42 (CI:0.87,2.32; p=0.16) times that of BTB autograft, respectively, although none proved statistically significant. Meniscal repair failure is associated with significantly lower 6-year scores for all KOOS components and the IKDC (p<0.001). However, there was no significant difference in MARX activity at 6-years (p=0.27). Conclusion: In the setting of primary ACLR, the risk of meniscal repair failure is increased with medial versus lateral meniscal repair. Patients with low or high baseline activity levels are also at an increased risk. ACL graft choice seems to have an effect on meniscal repair failure that approaches but does not reach statistical significance. A larger sample size may be required to accept the null hypothesis. [Table: see text][Figure: see text]

scholarly journals Rates of Adverse Outcomes and Revision Surgery After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Study of 104,255 Procedures Using the National Hospital Episode Statistics Database for England, UK

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (11) ◽  
pp. 2533-2542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon G.F. Abram ◽  
Andrew Judge ◽  
David J. Beard ◽  
Andrew J. Price
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Embolism ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
National Hospital ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Meniscal Surgery ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: After an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, ACL reconstruction is an elective procedure, and therefore, an understanding of the attributable risk from undergoing ACL reconstruction is necessary for patients to make a fully informed treatment decision. Purpose: To determine the absolute risk of adverse outcomes including reoperation after ACL reconstruction with comparison, where possible, to the rate of adverse events reported in the general population. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: National hospital data on all ACL reconstructions performed in England between April 1, 1997, and March 31, 2017, were analyzed. Revision cases, bilateral procedures within 6 months, and cases with concurrent cartilage or multiple ligament surgery were excluded. The primary outcome was the occurrence of at least 1 serious complication (myocardial infarction, stroke, pulmonary embolism, infection requiring surgery, fasciotomy, neurovascular injury, or death) within 90 days. Additionally, 5-year rates of revision ACL reconstruction, contralateral ACL reconstruction, and meniscal surgery were investigated. Results: There were 133,270 ACL reconstructions performed, of which 104,255 were eligible for analysis. Within 90 days, serious complications occurred in 675 (0.65% [95% CI, 0.60-0.70]), including 494 reoperations for infections (0.47% [95% CI, 0.43-0.52]) and 129 for pulmonary embolism (0.12% [95% CI, 0.10-0.15]). Of 54,275 procedures with at least 5 years’ follow-up, 1746 (3.22% [95% CI, 3.07-3.37]) underwent revision ACL reconstruction in the same knee, 1553 underwent contralateral ACL reconstruction (2.86% [95% CI, 2.72-3.01]), and 340 underwent meniscal surgery (0.63% [95% CI, 0.56-0.70]). The overall risk of serious complications fell over time (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.96 per year [95% CI, 0.95-0.98]); however, older patients (adjusted OR, 1.11 per 5 years [95% CI, 1.07-1.16]) and patients with a greater modified Charlson Comorbidity Index (adjusted OR, 2.41 per 10 units [95% CI, 1.65-3.51]) were at a higher risk. For every 850 (95% CI, 720-1039) ACL reconstructions, 1 pulmonary embolism could be provoked. For every 213 (95% CI, 195-233), 1 native knee joint infection could be provoked. Conclusion: The overall risk of adverse events after ACL reconstruction is low; however, some rare but serious complications, including infections or pulmonary embolism, may occur. Around 3% of patients undergo further ipsilateral or contralateral ACL reconstruction within 5 years. These data will inform shared decision making between clinicians and patients considering their treatment options.

Two-Stage Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Bone Graft Options for Tunnel Augmentation

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 767-777 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hytham S. Salem ◽  
Derek P. Axibal ◽  
Michelle L. Wolcott ◽  
Armando F. Vidal ◽  
Eric C. McCarty ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Bone Graft ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Bone Tunnel ◽  
Allograft Bone ◽  
Graft Material ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: No consensus is available regarding the optimal choice of bone graft material for bone tunnel augmentation in revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery. Purpose: To compare the outcomes of different bone graft materials for staged revision ACL reconstruction. Study design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic review using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was performed. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were queried through use of the terms anterior cruciate ligament and revision to identify all studies reporting outcomes of bone tunnel grafting in 2-stage revision ACL reconstruction. Data extracted included indications for 2-stage surgery, surgical technique, graft material, time between surgeries, rehabilitation protocols, physical examination findings, patient-reported outcomes, and radiographic and histologic findings. Results: The analysis included 7 studies with a total of 234 patients. The primary outcome in 2 studies was graft incorporation (mean follow-up, 8.8 months), whereas the other 5 studies reported clinical outcomes with follow-up mean ± SD of 4.2 ± 2.1 years. The indication for bone grafting and between-stage protocol varied among studies. Autograft was used in 4 studies: iliac crest bone autograft (ICBG, n = 3) and tibial bone autograft (TBA, n = 1). In 2 studies, the authors investigated the outcomes of allograft: allograft bone matrix (ABM) and allograft bone chips (AC). Finally, 1 study compared ICBG to a synthetic bone substitute. Radiographic evaluation of bone graft integration after the first stage was reported in 4 studies, with an average duration of 4.9 months. In 4 studies, the authors reported the time interval between first and second surgeries, with an average of 6.1 months for ICBG compared with 8.7 months for allogenic and synthetic grafts. Revision ACL graft failure rates were reported by 5 studies, including 1 study with ABM (6.1%), 1 study with AC (8.3%), 1 study with TBA (0%), and 2 studies with ICBG (0% and 2%). Conclusion: The indications for staged ACL reconstruction and the rehabilitation protocol between stages need to be clearly established. The available data indicate that autograft for bone tunnel grafting in 2-stage ACL revision may be associated with a lower risk of revision ACL reconstruction graft failure compared with allograft bone.

scholarly journals Significant Increase in the Rate of Meniscal and Chondral Injuries Between Primary and Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. (188)

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10_suppl5) ◽  
pp. 2325967121S0030
Author(s):  
Adnan Saithna ◽  
Charles Pioger ◽  
Johnny Rayes ◽  
Ibrahim Haidar ◽  
Thomas FRADIN ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Medial Meniscus ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Chondral Lesions ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Meniscal Lesions ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Primary Acl Reconstruction

Objectives: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are often associated with meniscal and chondral lesions. Meniscal lesions are present in up to 50% of ACL injured knees, and chondral lesions occur with an incidence of 20% to 40% in acute ACL-injured knees. The major importance of this lies in the fact that menisectomy and severe chondral damage are important predictors of poor outcomes including the subsequent development of knee osteoarthritis. Furthermore, patient reported outcomes following revision ACL reconstruction remain inferior to primary ACL reconstruction and this may, at least in part, be due to an increased incidence and severity of meniscal and chondral injuries. Although multiple studies have demonstrated that meniscal and chondral lesions are generally present at a higher rate at the time of revision ACL reconstruction when compared to primary ACL reconstruction, large studies following individual patients through primary and revision ACL reconstruction and tracking the change in the occurence of these injuries are scarce. The primary objective of this study was to determine the proportion of patients with meniscal and chondral injuries at the time of primary ACL reconstruction and determine how this rate changed by the time they underwent revision ACL reconstruction. The hypothesis was that the proportion of patients with meniscal and/or chondral lesions would be significantly greater at revision ACL reconstruction when compared to the primary procedures. Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent primary and then revision ACL reconstruction between March 1999 and February 2018 were identified using a single center registry. Patient characteristics, and intraoperative data from each procedure were collected and analyzed. This specifically included the occurrence and type of meniscal and chondral pathology. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the study sample using medians, descriptive data analysis was conducted depending on the nature of the criteria. Comparison between variables were assessed with student’s t test for quantitative variables and Mcnemar test for categorical variables. Statistical significance was set a t p<0.05. Results: 213 consecutive patients underwent both primary ACL reconstruction and then revision surgery during the study period. The average time from primary ACLR to Revision was 46.8 ± 36.6 months (range 5-181).The mean age of patients at primary ACLR was 22.21±7.21 years. The mean age of patients at revision ACLR 26.1 ± 8.3 years. The mean IKDC for the entire population was 85.53 ± 11.59, The mean ACL-RSI score was 71.89 ± 23.95. The mean Lysholm score was 91.77±10.24. The proportion of patients with chondral lesions significantly increased from 7% at primary ACL to 15.5% at revision ACL (p < 0.05). Meniscal lesions also significantly increased from 44.6 % at primary ACLR to 70% at revision ACLR (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the rate of lateral meniscal lesions (11.7 vs 13.1, p > 0.05). However, the proportion of patients with a medial meniscus lesion (25.4 vs 36.2, p < 0.05) and bimeniscal lesions (7.5 vs 20.7, p < 0.05) increased significantly at revision ACL reconstruction. Conclusions: The proportion of patients with meniscal and//or chondral injuries at the time of revision ACL reconstruction is significantly higher than at the time of primary ACL reconstruction. Specifically, the rate of medial meniscus and bimeniscal injuries is significantly higher in patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction

scholarly journals Posterior Slope Reducing Osteotomy With Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
pp. 263502542110326
Author(s):  
Richard Danilkowicz ◽  
Kier Maddox Blevins ◽  
Brian Lau ◽  
Annunziato Amendola
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Tibial Slope ◽  
Tibial Osteotomy ◽  
Posterior Slope ◽  
Posterior Tibial ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Closing Wedge ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Modern techniques for graft choice, preparation, and fixation for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction demonstrate excellent longevity and return-to-play rates; however, up to 10% to 18% of cases continue to suffer reruptures, with even higher rates in specific subsets of patients. Indications: Normally, the posterior tibial slope is measured between 7° and 10°, with biomechanical and observational studies showing that posterior slope greater than 12° increases the risk of graft failure by 5× by allowing for increased anterior tibial translation, putting increased stress on the graft. The primary indication for a slope correction osteotomy with a revision ACL reconstruction is a patient with tibial slope greater than 12° who has failed prior ACL reconstruction. Technique Description: In our preferred technique, we illustrate a slope reducing anterior closing wedge proximal tibial osteotomy with concurrent revision ACL reconstruction rather than a staged ACL reconstruction. Results: The primary benefit of this technique is the ability to correct the tibial slope and reconstruct the ACL in one setting, which decreases recovery time, costs, and risks to the patients by eliminating an additional procedure. Discussion/Conclusion: In cases of ACL reconstruction failure, particularly in patients with multiple failures, an increased posterior tibial slope may be a contributing factor. Anterior closing wedge osteotomy has been shown to be an effective treatment, in patients with a native slope greater than 12°. A slope reducing anterior closing wedge proximal tibial osteotomy with concurrent revision ACL reconstruction rather than a staged ACL reconstruction has a wide array of benefits.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document