Time to focus on ACL revision: ESSKA 2022 consensus

Modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors affecting surgical failure after revision ACL reconstruction: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Research on factors influencing the outcomes of revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is relatively scarce and mostly relies even on reports from a single group. Understanding the factors contributing to the failure of revision ACL reconstruction can provide valuable information for achieving better clinical outcomes and assist in patient counseling before surgery. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the factors contributing to surgical failure after revision ACL reconstruction.

METHODS

The medical records of consecutive patients who underwent single-bundle revision ACL reconstruction using the transportal technique between 2010 and 2020 and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years were retrospectively reviewed. Eligible patients were classified into two groups on the basis of the presence of surgical failure during the follow-up period (group NF, patients who did not experience surgical failure; group F, patients who experienced surgical failure). In this study, surgical failure after revision ACL reconstruction was defined as meeting any of the following conditions during follow-up: the presence of graft re-tear confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), anterior-posterior laxity graded ≥ 2, or rotational laxity graded ≥ 2. A comparative analysis was conducted on demographic data, as well as peri-, intra-, and postoperative data between the groups. Additionally, a regression analysis was performed to investigate factors influencing surgical failure after revision ACL reconstruction.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients were included (group NF, 40 patients; group F, 18 patients). In between-group comparisons of demographic, peri-, and intra-operative data, group F exhibited a higher frequency of multiple revision surgeries (P = 0.001), increased preoperative osteoarthritis grade (P = 0.001), and shallower femoral tunnel depth (P = 0.002) compared with group NF. At the final follow-up, group F demonstrated relatively poor clinical outcomes, both subjectively and objectively. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that all variables that showed differences in the preceding comparisons were independent factors affecting surgical failure after revision ACL reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical failure after revision ACL reconstruction can occur in a substantial number of patients, influenced by non-modifiable factors, such as cases corresponding to multiple revision surgery and preoperative osteoarthritis grade, and modifiable factors, such as femoral tunnel depth.

An anteromedial stabilization procedure has the most protective effect on the anterior cruciate ligament in tibial external rotation. A human knee model study

INTRODUCTION

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains associated with the risk of re-rupture and persisting rotational instability. Additional extraarticular anterolateral stabilization procedures stabilize the tibial internal rotation and lead to lower ACL failure rate and improved knee stability. However, data for additional stabilization of tibial external rotation is lacking and the importance of an anteromedial stabilization procedure is less well evaluated. Aim of this study is to investigate the influence of an extraarticular anteromedial stabilization procedure for the stabilization of the tibial external rotation and protection of the ACL from these rotational forces.

METHODS

Internal and external rotations of the tibia were applied to a finite element (FE) model with anatomical ACL, posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), lateral collateral ligament (LCL), medial collateral ligament (MCL) and intact medial and lateral meniscus. Five additional anatomic structures (Anteromedial stabilization/anteromedial ligament, AML, augmented superficial medial collateral ligament, sMCL, posterior oblique ligament, POL, anterolateral ligament, ALL, and popliteal tendon, PLT) were added to the FE model separately and then combined. The force histories within all structures were measured and determined for each case.

RESULTS

The anteromedial stabilization or imaginary AML was the main secondary stabilizer of tibial external rotation (90% of overall ACL force reduction). The AML reduced the load on the ACL by 9% in tibial external rotation which could not be achieved by an augmented sMCL (-1%). The AML had no influence in tibial internal rotation (-1%). In the combined measurements with all additional structures (AML, ALL, PLT, POL) the load on the ACL was reduced by 10% in tibial external rotation.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that an additional anteromedial stabilization procedure secures the tibial external rotation and has the most protective effect on the ACL during these external rotational forces.

Refixation of the anterior cruciate ligament: A biomechanical analysis of suture techniques in a porcine model

Purpose

Refixation of acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears represents an increasingly popular treatment option. Systematic evaluations of various suture technique parameters are still pending. We therefore aimed to evaluate the mechanical pull-out outcomes of various suture methods for optimization of ACL refixation.

Methods

Sixty fresh knees from mature domestic pigs were dissected and the femoral attachment of the ACL was peeled off. The 60 knees were divided in 10 groups and sutured as follows: (A) one suture (1, 2, 4 and 6 passes), (B) two sutures (2, 4 and 6 passes each; sutures knotted together as a loop) and (C) two sutures (2, 4 and 6 passes each, sutures knotted separately). The pull-out test was conducted using a validated electrodynamic testing machine. First occurrence of failure, maximum pull-out load and stiffness were measured. Suture failure was defined as pull-out of the ACL.

Results

Two-point fixation, using two sutures, with at least two passes, showed the most favourable biomechanical stability. The maximum pull-out load was significantly higher with two sutures (529.5 N) used compared to one (310.4 N), p < 0.001. No significant differences were found for maximum pull-out loads between two-point fixation versus one-point fixation but stiffness was significantly higher with two-point fixation (107.4 N/mm vs. 79.4 N/mm, p < 0.001). More passes resulted in higher maximum pull-out loads.

Conclusion

The results suggest using two independent sutures, refixed separately and at least two suture passes, is appropriate for ACL refixation. More suture passes provide additional strength but are technically challenging to achieve during surgery.

Level of Evidence

Level IV.

Enthesis maturation in engineered ligaments is differentially driven by loads that mimic slow growth elongation and rapid cyclic muscle movement

Entheses are complex attachments that translate load between elastic-ligaments and stiff-bone via organizational and compositional gradients. Neither natural healing, repair, nor engineered replacements restore these gradients, contributing to high re-tear rates. Previously, we developed a culture system which guides ligament fibroblasts in high-density collagen gels to develop early postnatal-like entheses, however further maturation is needed. Mechanical cues, including slow growth elongation and cyclic muscle activity, are critical to enthesis development in vivo but these cues have not been widely explored in engineered entheses and their individual contribution to maturation is largely unknown. Our objective here was to investigate how slow stretch, mimicking ACL growth rates, and intermittent cyclic loading, mimicking muscle activity, individually drive enthesis maturation in our system so to shed light on the cues governing enthesis development, while further developing our tissue engineered replacements. Interestingly, we found these loads differentially drive organizational maturation, with slow stretch driving improvements in the interface/enthesis region, and cyclic load improving the ligament region. However, despite differentially affecting organization, both loads produced improvements to interface mechanics and zonal composition. This study provides insight into how mechanical cues differentially affect enthesis development, while producing some of the most organized engineered enthesis to date. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Entheses attach ligaments to bone and are critical to load transfer; however, entheses do not regenerate with repair or replacement, contributing to high re-tear rates. Mechanical cues are critical to enthesis development in vivo but their individual contribution to maturation is largely unknown and they have not been widely explored in engineered replacements. Here, using a novel culture system, we provide new insight into how slow stretch, mimicking ACL growth rates, and intermittent cyclic loading, mimicking muscle activity, differentially affect enthesis maturation in engineered ligament-to-bone tissues, ultimately producing some of the most organized entheses to date. This system is a promising platform to explore cues regulating enthesis formation so to produce functional engineered replacements and better drive regeneration following repair.

Contralateral hamstring autografts do not provide benefit compared to ipsilateral hamstring autografts in primary or revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of primary or revision ACL reconstruction (ACLR) after contralateral hamstring autografts versus ipsilateral hamstring autograft harvest.

METHODS

Three databases (MEDLINE, PubMed and EMBASE) were searched from inception to April 27th, 2023 for studies investigating contralateral hamstring autografts in primary or revision ACLR. The authors adhered to the PRISMA and R-AMSTAR guidelines as well as the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data on demographics, strength measures, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and rates of positive Lachman test, positive pivot-shift test and graft rupture were extracted. PROMs included Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Tegner scores.

RESULTS

Nine studies comprising 371 patients were included in this review. In primary ACLR, there were no significant differences between contralateral and ipsilateral groups in isokinetic hamstring torque in the non-ACLR limb or isokinetic quadriceps torque in both limbs when tested at 60, 90, 120 or 180 degrees/second. Isokinetic hamstring torque in the non-ACLR limb was significantly weaker in the contralateral group at six months for primary ACLR; however, these deficits did not persist. There were no significant differences in postoperative median Tegner scores and Lysholm scores between contralateral and ipsilateral groups in primary ACLR. There were no significant differences in postoperative median Tegner, mean Lysholm and IKDC scores between groups in revision ACLR. There were no significant differences in positive Lachman, positive pivot-shift and rupture rates in primary ACLR between groups. Rates of positive Lachman and pivot-shift were slightly higher in the contralateral than ipsilateral group for revision ACLR.

CONCLUSION

Contralateral hamstring autografts results in comparable muscle strength to ipsilateral hamstring autografts, with the exception of weaker hamstring strengths in the early postoperative period. Patient-reported outcome measures were similar between the two groups across both primary and revision ACLR, with rates of instability and failure being similar between groups for primary ACLR. Contralateral hamstring grafts do not provide additional benefit when compared to ipsilateral options for either primary or revision ACLR, and should be used only in select circumstances including insufficient ipsilateral hamstring grafts or situations where quadriceps or patella autografts are not optimal.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Management of anterior cruciate ligament revision in adults: the 2022 ESSKA consensus part I-diagnostics and preoperative planning

PURPOSE

The aim of this ESSKA consensus is to give recommendations based on evidence and expert opinion to improve diagnosis, preoperative planning, indication and surgical strategy in ACL revision.

METHODS

The European expert surgeons and scientists were divided into four groups to participate in this consensus. A "literature group" (four surgeons); "steering group" (14 surgeons and scientists); "rating group" (19 surgeons) and finally "peer review group" (51 representatives of the ESSKA-affiliated national societies from 27 countries). The steering group prepared eighteen question-answer sets. The quality of the answers received grades of recommendation ranging from A (high-level scientific support), to B (scientific presumption), C (low level scientific support) or D (expert opinion). These question-answer sets were then evaluated by the rating group. All answers were scored from 1 to 9. The comments of the rating group were incorporated by the steering group and the consensus was submitted to the rating group a second time. Once a general consensus was reached between the steering and rating groups, the question-answer sets were submitted to the peer review group. A final combined meeting of all the members of the consensus was held to ratify the document.

RESULTS

The literature review for the diagnosis and preoperative planning of ACL revision revealed a rather low scientific quality. None of the 18 questions was graded A and six received a grade B. The mean rating of all the questions by the rating group was 8.4 ± 0.3. The questions and recommendations are listed below.

CONCLUSION

ACL revision surgery is a widely debated subject with many different opinions and techniques. The literature reveals a poor level of standardisation. Therefore, this international consensus project is of great importance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Management of anterior cruciate ligament revision in adults: the 2022 ESSKA consensus: part II-surgical strategy

PURPOSE

The aim of this ESSKA consensus is to give recommendations based on scientific evidence and expert opinion to improve the diagnosis, preoperative planning, indication and surgical strategy in Anterior Cruciate Ligament revision.

METHODS

Part 2, presented herein, followed exactly the same methodology as Part 1: the so-called ESSKA formal consensus derived from the Delphi method. Eighteen questions were ultimately asked. The quality of the answers received the following grades of recommendation: Grade A (high level scientific support), Grade B (scientific presumption), Grade C (low level scientific support) or Grade D (expert opinion). All answers were scored from 1 to 9 by the raters. Once a general consensus had been reached between the steering and rating groups, the question-answer sets were submitted to the peer-review group. A final combined meeting of all the members of the consensus was then held to ratify the document.

RESULTS

The review of the literature revealed a rather low scientific quality of studies examining the surgical strategy in cases of ACL reconstruction failure. Of the 18 questions, only 1 received a Grade A rating; 5, a Grade B rating; and 9, grades of C or D. The three remaining complex questions received further evaluations for each portion of the question and were looked at in more detail for the following grades: B and D; A, C and D; or A, B, C and D. The mean rating of all questions by the rating group was 8.0 + - 1.1. The questions and recommendations are listed in the article.

CONCLUSION

ACL revision surgery, especially the surgical strategy, is a widely debated subject with many different opinions and techniques. The literature reveals a poor level of standardization. Therefore, this international European consensus project is of great importance and clinical relevance for guiding the management of ACL revision in adults.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Management of anterior cruciate ligament revision in adults: the 2022 ESSKA consensus part III-indications for different clinical scenarios using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method

PURPOSE

The aim of the ESSKA 2022 consensus Part III was to develop patient-focused, contemporary, evidence-based, guidelines on the indications for revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery (ACLRev).

METHODS

The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) was used to provide recommendations on the appropriateness of surgical treatment versus conservative treatment in different clinical scenarios based on current scientific evidence in conjunction with expert opinion. A core panel defined the clinical scenarios with a moderator and then guided a panel of 17 voting experts through the RAM tasks. Through a two-step voting process, the panel established a consensus as to the appropriateness of ACLRev for each scenario based on a nine-point Likert scale (in which a score in the range 1-3 was considered 'inappropriate', 4-6 'uncertain', and 7-9 'appropriate').

RESULTS

The criteria used to define the scenarios were: age (18-35 years vs 36-50 years vs 51-60 years), sports activity and expectation (Tegner 0-3 vs 4-6 vs 7-10), instability symptoms (yes vs no), meniscus status (functional vs repairable vs non-functional meniscus), and osteoarthritis (OA) (Kellgren-Lawrence [KL] grade 0-I-II vs grade III). Based on these variables, a set of 108 clinical scenarios was developed. ACLRev was considered appropriate in 58%, inappropriate in 12% (meaning conservative treatment is indicated), and uncertain in 30%. Experts considered ACLRev appropriate for patients with instability symptoms, aged ≤ 50 years, regardless of sports activity level, meniscus status, and OA grade. Results were much more controversial in patients without instability symptoms, while higher inappropriateness was related to scenarios with older age (51-60 years), low sporting expectation, non-functional meniscus, and knee OA (KL III).

CONCLUSION

This expert consensus establishes guidelines as to the appropriateness of ACLRev based on defined criteria and provides a useful reference for clinical practice in determining treatment indications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

High revision arthroscopy rate after ACL reconstruction in men's professional team sports

PURPOSE

The study analysed unique data on anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries among German professional male team sports over five consecutive seasons with the aim of improving medical outcomes in the future. Sport-specific differences in injury occurrence, concomitant injuries, timing of ACL reconstruction, graft type selection and short-term complications were examined.

METHODS

This retrospective study analysed trauma insurance data on all complete ACL tears from players with at least one competitive match appearance in the two highest divisions of German male basketball, ice hockey, football and handball. Each complete ACL tear registered by clubs or physicians between the 2014/15 and 2018/19 seasons with the German statutory accidental insurance for professional athletes (VBG) as part of occupational accident reporting was included.

RESULTS

In total, 189 out of 7517 players (2.5%) sustained an ACL injury, mainly in handball (n = 82; 43.4%) and football (n = 72; 38.1%) followed by ice hockey (n = 20; 10.6%) and basketball (n = 15; 7.9%).Seventeen players (9.0%) also sustained a second ACL injury. Thus, 206 ACL injuries were included in the analysis. The overall match incidence of ACL injuries was 0.5 per 1000 h and was highest in handballs (1.1 injuries per 1000 h). A total of 70.4% of ACL injuries involved concomitant injury to other knee structures, and 29.6% were isolated ACL injuries. The highest rate of isolated ACL injuries was seen in ice hockey (42.9%). All ACL injuries, except for one career-ending injury, required surgery. In the four analysed team sports, hamstring tendons (71.4%) were the most commonly used grafts for ACL reconstruction; football had the highest percentage of alternative grafts (48.7%). During rehabilitation, 22.9% of all surgically treated ACL injuries (n = 205) required at least two surgical interventions, and 15.6% required revision arthroscopy. The main cause of revision arthroscopy (n = 32; 50.0%) was range-of-motion deficit due to arthrofibrosis or cyclops formation.

CONCLUSION

The present study shows an overall high rate of revision arthroscopy after ACLR (15.6%), which should encourage surgeons and therapists to evaluate their treatment and rehabilitation strategies in this specific subpopulation. Hamstring tendon grafts are most commonly used for ACL reconstruction but have the highest revision and infection rates. Handball shows the highest ACL injury risk of the four evaluated professional team sports. Concomitant injuries occur in the majority of cases, with the highest share of isolated ACL injuries occurring in ice hockey.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Double-bundle non-anatomic ACL revision reconstruction with allograft resulted in a low revision rate at 10 years

PURPOSE

This study aimed at reporting the long-term second revision rate and subjective clinical outcomes from a cohort of patients who underwent a double-bundle (DB) ACLR first revision with allograft at a single institution.

METHODS

The Institutional database was searched according to the following inclusion criteria: (1) patients that underwent DB-ACL first revision with Achilles tendon allograft, (2) surgery performed between January 2000 and December 2012, (3) age at revision ≥ 18 y/o. Patients' general information, history, surgical data, and personal contacts were extracted from charts. An online survey platform was implemented to collect responses via email. The survey questions included: date of surgeries, surgical data, date of graft failure and subsequent second ACL revision surgery, any other surgery of the index knee, contralateral ACLR, KOOS score, and Tegner scores.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients were included in the survival analysis, mean age at revision 32 ± 9.2 y/o, 71 males, mean BMI 24.7 ± 2.7, mean time from ACL to revision 6.8 ± 5.4 years, mean follow-up time 10.7 ± 1.4 years. There were 12 (15%) second ACL revisions during the follow-up period, three females and nine males, at a mean of 4.5 ± 3 years after the index surgery. The overall survival rates were 85% from a second ACL revision and 68% from all reoperations of the index knee. Considering only the successful procedures (61 patients), at final follow-up, the mean values for the KOOS subscales were 84 ± 15.5 for Pain, 88.1 ± 13.6 for Symptoms, 93 ± 11.6 for ADL, 75 ± 24.5 for Sport, and 71 ± 19.6 for Qol. Twenty-nine (48%) patients performed sports activity at the same level as before ACLR failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Double-bundle ACL revision with fresh-frozen Achilles allograft yields satisfactory results at long-term follow-up, with an 85% survival rate from a second ACL revision at mean 10 years' follow-up and good patient-reported clinical scores.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.