Subsequent surgery after primary ACLR results in a significantly inferior subjective outcome at a 2-year follow-up

Purpose To analyze minimal important change (MIC), patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) and treatment failure after reoperation within 2 years of primary ACL reconstruction and compare them with patients without additional surgery. Methods This is a retrospective follow-up study of a cohort from a single-clinic database with all primary ACLRs enrolled between 2005 and 2015. Additional surgery within 2 years of the primary ACLR on the ipsilateral knee was identified using procedural codes and analysis of medical records. Patients who completed the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) questionnaire preoperatively and at the 2-year follow-up were included in the study. MIC, PASS and treatment failure thresholds were applied using the aggregate KOOS (KOOS4) and the five KOOS subscales. Results The cohort included 6030 primary ACLR and from this 1112 (18.4%) subsequent surgeries were performed on 1018 (16.9%) primary ACLRs. 24 months follow-up for KOOS was obtained on 523 patients (54%) in the reoperation group and 2084 (44%) in the no-reoperation group. MIC; the no-reoperation group had a significantly higher improvement on all KOOS subscales, Pain 70.3 vs 60.2% (p < 0.01), Symptoms 72.1 vs 57.4% (p < 0.01), ADL 56.3 vs 51.2% (p < 0.01), Sport/Rec 67.3 vs 54.4% (p < 0.01), QoL 73.9 vs 56.3% (p < 0.01). PASS; 62% in the non-reoperation group reported their KOOS4 scores to be satisfactory, while only 35% reported satisfactory results in the reoperated cohort (p < 0.05). Treatment failure; 2% in the non-reoperation group and 6% (p < 0.05) in the reoperation group considered their treatment to have failed. Conclusion Patients who underwent subsequent surgeries within 2 years of primary ACLR reported significantly inferior outcomes in MIC, PASS and treatment failure compared to the non-reoperated counterpart at the 2-year follow-up. This study provides clinicians with important information and knowledge about the outcomes after an ACLR with subsequent additional surgery. Level of evidence III.

‘I Was Young, I Wanted to Return to Sport, and Re-Ruptured My ACL’ – Young Female Patients’ Voices on the Experience of Sustaining an ACL Re-Rupture, a Mixed Method Study

Background Despite ACL re-ruptures being common, research on patient experiences after knee trauma has primarily focused on the time after primary ACL reconstruction. Integrating qualitative research and patient experiences can facilitate researchers and clinicians in understanding the burden of an ACL re-rupture. The aim of the study was to explore the experiences of an ACL re-rupture journey in young active females aiming to return to knee-strenuous sports after primary ACL reconstruction. Method A two-stage partially mixed sequential dominant status design was used. Fifteen young (19.1[range 16-23] years old) female who suffered an ACL re-rupture were interviewed. Qualitative content analysis using deductive approach based on Wiese-Bjornstal’s ‘integrated model of psychological response to injury’ was used. Results The results are presented in two timelines 1) from first ACL injury to ACL re-rupture, and 2) from ACL re-rupture to present day, and further stratified according to the domains of the ‘integrated model of psychological response to injury’. Results in the first timeline are summarised into seven categories: Finding hope for the journey; Accepting my ACL injury; I succeeded; What matters now? Who am I?; Where will this end? What is going to happen? In the second timeline, eight categories were identified: Fighting spirit; A helping hand; Working hard; I am a new me; I am destroyed; Loneliness; Painful changes; and, I could have made it to the pro´s. Conclusion Young females who suffered an ACL re-rupture did not express any positive experience following their first ACL injury, however, in contrast, expressed positive experiences and personal growth after going through the ACL re-rupture journey, characterized by a lot of struggling, and ultimately lead to the experience of becoming a new, stronger person.

DOES PARTIAL MENISCECTOMY AFFECT ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION RESULTS?

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the application of partial meniscectomy concomitant with primary ACL reconstruction, using the graft from the patellar tendon with individuals who underwent only ACL reconstruction, in clinical functional criteria and degree of osteoarthritis (OA), after 10 years of the surgical process. Methods: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study with 37 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction with a graft from the patellar tendon, associated or not with partial meniscectomy, divided into 2 groups: with meniscal injury (n = 22) and without meniscal injury (n = 15). Anthropometric data and four outcome measures were used to analyze the results: SF-36 questionnaire, arc of motion assessment, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Ahlbäck Radiographic Classification. Results: No differences were found for health-related quality of life, arc of motion, functional condition and knee OA severity/grade in patients who underwent partial or no meniscectomy in conjunction with ACL reconstruction (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Participants who underwent partial meniscectomy in conjunction with primary ACL reconstruction with a graft from the patellar tendon, after 10 years of the surgical process, showed no significant differences in the clinical functional criteria and severity of knee OA, compared to individuals who underwent only ACL reconstruction. Level of Evidence II, Prognostic study.

Knee Hyperextension Greater Than 5° Is a Risk Factor for Failure in ACL Reconstruction Using Hamstring Graft

Background: The degree of knee hyperextension in isolation has not been studied in detail as a risk factor that could lead to increased looseness or graft failure after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Purpose: To analyze whether more than 5° of passive knee hyperextension is associated with worse functional outcomes and greater risk of graft failure after primary ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autograft. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A cohort of patients who had primary ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autografts was divided into 2 groups based on passive contralateral knee hyperextension greater than 5° (hyperextension group) and less than 5° (control group) of hyperextension. Groups were matched by age, sex, and associated meniscal tears. The following data were collected and compared between the groups: patient data (age and sex), time from injury to surgery, passive knee hyperextension, KT-1000 arthrometer laxity, pivot shift, associated meniscal injury and treatment (meniscectomy or repair), contralateral knee ligament injury, intra-articular graft size, follow-up time, occurrence of graft failure, and postoperative Lysholm knee scale and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective form scores. Results: Data from 358 patients initially included in the study were analyzed; 22 were excluded because the time from injury to surgery was greater than 24 months, and 22 were lost to follow-up. From the cohort of 314 patients, 102 had more than 5° of knee hyperextension. A control group of the same size (n = 102) was selected by matching among the other 212 patients. Significant differences in the incidence of graft failure (14.7% vs 2.9%; P = .005) and Lysholm knee scale score (86.4 ± 9.8 vs 89.6 ± 6.1; P = .018) were found between the 2 groups. Conclusion: Patients with more than 5° of contralateral knee hyperextension submitted to single-bundle ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendons have a higher failure rate than patients with less than 5° of knee hyperextension.

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

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

Augmentation of Primary ACL Reconstruction With a Modified Ellison Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis in High-Risk Patients: A Pilot Study

Background: Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) has been used to augment primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction to reduce the risk of reinjury. Most LET procedures result in a construct that is fixed to both the femur and the tibia. In a modified Ellison procedure, the construct is only fixed distally, reducing the risk of inadvertently overconstraining the lateral compartment. Purpose: To evaluate the use of the modified Ellison procedure in a cohort of patients deemed to be at a high risk of further ACL injury after primary ACL reconstruction. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Included were 25 consecutive patients with at least 2 of the following risk factors: age <20 years at the time of surgery, previous contralateral ACL reconstruction, positive family history of ACL rupture (parent or sibling), generalized ligamentous laxity (Beighton ≥4), grade 3 pivot shift in the consulting room, a desire to return to a pivoting sport, and an elite or professional status. All patients underwent primary ACL reconstruction with an additional modified Ellison procedure. Postoperatively, patients completed the IKDC subjective knee evaluation form (International Knee Documentation Committee), KOOS Quality of Life subscale (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score), ACL–Return to Sport After Injury Scale, Marx Activity Rating Scale, and SANE score (Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation). Results: At 12-month follow-up, the mean outcome scores were as follows: SANE, 94/100; IKDC, 92/100; Marx, 13/16; ACL–Return to Sport, 85/100; and KOOS, 77/100. At 24 months, return-to-sport data were available for 23 of 25 patients; 17 (74%) were playing at the same level or higher than preinjury and 2 at a lower level. One patient (4%) sustained a contact mechanism graft rupture at 12 months. There were 2 (9%) contralateral ACL injuries, including 1 ACL graft rupture, at 11 and 22 months postoperatively. There was a further contralateral ACL graft rupture at 26 months. Conclusion: The use of the modified Ellison procedure as a LET augmentation of a primary ACL reconstruction to produce a low graft rupture rate appeared to be safe in a cohort considered to be at a high risk of reinjury. The procedure showed promise in terms of reducing further graft injuries.

Return to Baseline Physical Activity After Bone–Patellar Tendon–Bone Versus Hamstring Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) and hamstring tendon (HT) autografts are the most utilized grafts for primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The ability of a patient to return to a preinjury level of physical activity is a key consideration in choice of graft; the influence of graft choice on this metric lacks consensus in the literature. Purpose: To assess the effects of autograft choice (BPTB vs HT) for primary ACL reconstruction on return to baseline level of physical activity and/or sports participation. Study Design: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing the use of BPTB and HT autografts for primary ACL reconstruction was conducted. The electronic databases EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science were comprehensively queried through September 23, 2019. The primary outcome was return to preinjury level of activity/sports. Secondary outcomes included knee stability testing (Lachman, KT-1000 arthrometer, and pivot-shift tests) and clinical subjective knee scores (Tegner, Cincinnati, International Knee Documentation Committee, and Lysholm). Two independent reviewers were involved in the screening of titles and abstracts, data extraction, and the assessment of risk of bias. Meta-analyses were performed respecting the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention. Results: A total of 29 studies (N = 3099 patients) were eligible for this review, of which 13 (n = 1029 patients) reported on return to baseline level of sports as an endpoint. The risk ratio (RR) of using BPTB vs HT on return to baseline sport level was 1.03 (0.91-1.17; P = .63). Absence of a positive pivot-shift test was the only secondary outcome, with a statistically significant RR of 0.66 (95% CI, 0.50-0.86) in favor of BPTB autografts ( P = .002). Conclusion: In reviewing the current literature, no recommendation can be made on the optimal graft choice when using a return to baseline level of physical activity and/or sports participation as a primary metric.