Comparative study between mono-bundle bone-patellar tendon-bone, double-bundle hamstring and mono-bundle bone-patellar tendon-bone combined with a modified Lemaire extra-articular procedure in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Evaluation of Anterior Tibial Translation Under Physiological Axial Load After ACL Reconstruction With Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis

Background

Postoperative laxity correlates with negative clinical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The influence of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) on anteroposterior translation is unclear.

Purpose/Hypothesis

This study aimed to evaluate the reduction in radiographic static anterior tibial translation (SATT) and dynamic anterior tibial translation (DATT) after LET as an adjunctive procedure to ACLR. It was hypothesized that adding a LET procedure would have no effect on postoperative SATT and DATT.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Patients who underwent primary ACLR with hamstring tendon autografts between 2020 and 2022 were reviewed, and those who underwent ACLR and LET as an anterolateral associate procedure were paired 1 to 1 with those who underwent isolated ACLR (control) based on age, sex, preoperative SATT, and posterior tibial slope (PTS). The indications for LET were age <18 years and anterolateral rotary instability (grade ≥2 pivot shift). A previously validated technique was used to measure SATT, DATT, and PTS on lateral weightbearing and lateral stress knee radiographs. Preoperative and 9-month postoperative radiographs were compared between the 2 groups.

Results

A total of 72 patients were included in the analysis (n = 36 patients in each group). The inter- and intraobserver reliability of the SATT, DATT, and PTS measurements was excellent (intraclass correlation coefficients, 0.88-0.99). The mean pre- and postoperative SATT in the ACLR+LET group was 2.44 ± 2.90 mm and 2.44 ± 2.38 mm, respectively, compared with 2.60 ± 2.99 mm and 2.12 ± 2.74 mm, respectively, in the control group. The mean pre- and postoperative reduction in side-to-side DATT in the ACLR+LET group was 5.44 ± 4.65 mm and 1.13 ± 2.95 mm, respectively, compared with 5.03 ± 3.66 mm and 2 ± 3.12 mm, respectively, in the control group. There was no pre- to postoperative difference in SATT (P = .51). However, the side-to-side DATT was reduced by 3.66 ± 3.37 mm postoperatively (P < .001), without significant differences between groups (P = .24).

Conclusion

Including a LET procedure for patients undergoing ACLR did not reduce SATT; that is, it did not decrease the amount of tibial translation due to physiological axial load.

Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR) and Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis through the Modified Lemaire Technique versus Isolated ACLR: A Meta-analysis of Clinical Outcomes

Objective  Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) has been proposed to resolve rotatory instability following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of ACLR and ACLR with LET using the modified Lemaire technique. Materials and Methods  We performed a meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) staement. The literature search was performed on the PubMed, EBSCOHost, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and WileyOnline databases. The data extracted from the studies included were the study characteristics, the failure rate (graft or clinical failure) as the primary outcome, and the functional score as the secondary outcome. Comparisons were made between the patients who underwent isolated ACLR (ACLR group) and those submitted to ACLR and LET through the modified Lemaire technique (ACLR + LET group). Results  A total of 5 studies including 797 patients were evaluated. The ACLR + LET group presented a lower risk of failure and lower rate of rerupture than the ACLR group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.44; 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.26 to 0.75; I 2  = 9%; p  = 0.003). The ACLR + LET group presented higher scores on the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) regarding the following outcomes: pain, activities of daily living (ADL), sports, and quality of life (QOL), with mean differences of 0.20 (95%CI: 0.10 to 0.30; I 2  = 0%; p  < 0.0001), -0.20 (95%CI: -0.26 to -0.13; I 2  = 0%; p  < 0.00001), 0.20 (95%CI: 0.02 to 0.38; I 2  = 0%; p  = 0.03), and 0.50 (95%CI: 0.29 to 0.71; I 2  = 0%; p  < 0.00001) respectively when compared with the ACLR group. Conclusion  Adding LET through the modified Lemaire technique to ACLR may improve knee stability because of the lower rate of graft rerupture and the superiority in terms of clinical outcomes. Level of Evidence  I.

A review of Marcel Lemaire's original work on lateral extra-articular tenodesis

This classic discusses Marcel Lemaire's original publications in the context of modern surgical practice, including a description of his original lateral extra-articular tenodesis. Previously published in French, these translations shed light on his revelations regarding the anterior cruciate ligament's role in knee stability and his detailed insights into the ressaut rotatoire or the pivot shift phenomenon. We track the evolution of Lemaire's procedure since the publication of his original technique in 1967 which used a nylon cord superficial to the lateral collateral ligament followed by cast immobilisation for one month. We report his patient outcomes as he refines his methods through experiential learning. Lemaire's fundamental concepts in relation to anterior cruciate ligament deficiency remain relevant in contemporary clinical practice. Furthermore, the "modified Lemaire technique" has emerged as one of the preferred methods for lateral extra-articular tenodesis. We hope that disseminating his thoughts to a wider audience will help enlighten the ongoing debate regarding the management of rotatory instability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V - Expert Opinion.

Does combined anterior cruciate ligament and anterolateral ligament reconstruction improve return to sport?

PURPOSE

Only 50-65% of patients return to their previous sporting level after ACL rupture. The literature reports a reduced rate of graft rupture when an anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) is associated with ACL reconstruction. ACL reconstruction combined with ALL allows a higher return to sport at pre-injury level than isolated reconstruction in patients playing pivot-contact sports.

METHODS

A retrospective, single-centre study between 2012 and 2020 comparing reconstruction by hamstring tendon technique, isolated ACLR vs ACL with ALLR. An isokinetic test was performed at 6 months post-operatively and patients were re-contacted at a minimum 2-year follow-up to assess their level and delay to return to sport, graft rupture rate and functional evaluation.

RESULTS

83 patients were included, 42 in ACLR group and 41 in ACL + ALLR group. Four patients were lost to follow-up and 79 patients were analysed. No significant difference was found on the level of return to sport (28.2% vs. 42.5%; p = 0.18), return to competition (43% vs. 60%; p = 0.18), delay to sports return, isokinetic assessment, functional scores, but a significant difference was found on graft rupture rate in favour of ALLR (12.8% vs. 0%; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In our study, the addition of an ALL to ACL reconstruction did not improve pre-injury sports recovery or return to competition.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study, level of evidence 4.

Anatomical and Biomechanical Characteristics of the Anterolateral Ligament: A Descriptive Korean Cadaveric Study Using a Triaxial Accelerometer

Background and Objectives: The anterolateral ligament (ALL) could be the potential anatomical structure responsible for rotational instability after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to investigate the anatomical and biomechanical characteristics of the ALL in Korean cadaveric knee joints. Materials and Methods: Twenty fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were dissected and tested. Femoral and tibial footprints of the ALL were recorded. Pivot shift and Lachman tests were measured with KiRA. Results: The prevalence of ALL was 100%. The average distance of the tibial footprint to the tip of the fibular head was 19.85 ± 3.41 mm; from the tibial footprint to Gerdy's tubercle (GT) was 18.3 ± 4.19 mm; from the femoral footprint to the lateral femoral epicondyle was 10.25 ± 2.97 mm. ALL's footprint distance was the longest at 30° of flexion (47.83 ± 8.05 mm, p < 0.01) in a knee with intact ALL-ACL and neutral rotation. During internal rotation, the footprint distance was the longest at 30° of flexion (50.05 ± 8.88 mm, p < 0.01). Internal rotation produced a significant increase at all three angles after ACL-ALL were transected (p = 0.022), where the footprint distance was the longest at 30° of flexion (52.05 ± 7.60 mm). No significant difference was observed in KiRA measurements between intact ALL-ACL and ALL-transected knees for pivot shift and Lachman tests. However, ACL-ALL-transected knees showed significant differences compared to the intact ALL-ACL and ALL-transected knees (p < 0.01). Conclusions: The ALL was identified as a distinct ligament structure with a 100% prevalence in this cadaveric study. The ALL plays a protective role in internal rotational stability. An isolated ALL transection did not significantly affect the ALL footprint distances or functional stability tests. Therefore, the ALL is thought to act as a secondary supportive stabilizer for rotational stability of the knee joint in conjunction with the ACL.

Clinical and mechanical outcomes in isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction vs additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis or anterolateral ligament reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been a successful treatment for ACL rupture. However ongoing rotational instability can be an issue. Several surgical techniques have been recommended to overcome this including lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and more recently anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR).

AIM

To compare the clinical outcomes following ACL reconstruction (ACLR) alone or ACLR with either LET or ALLR.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted by means of four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and Clinical.Trials.Gov), and the Reference Citaion Analysis (https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/) to identify all studies investigating either or both of LET and ALLR. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for cohort studies was employed for critical appraisal and evaluation of all twenty-four studies which met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Pooled meta-analyses illustrated that ACLR with additional LET or ALLR results in improved pivot shift test scores, compared to isolated ACLR. There was no statistically significant difference in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) clinical scores with addition of either LET or ALLR. ACL re-rupture rates were compared between LET and ALLR techniques. There was a statistically significant difference between techniques, with a 1.14% rupture rate in ACLR +ALLR, and 4.03% rupture rate in ACLR + LET. Isolated ACLR re-rupture rates were 12.59%, significantly higher than when augmented with either ALLR or LET (P < 0.0001 for both groups). There were no statistical differences in pivot shift test or IKDC scores between LET and ALLR techniques.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis has found that use of either LET or ALLR in addition to ACLR results in improved mechanical outcomes suggesting surgeons should consider augmenting ACLR with an extra-articular procedure in patients with rotatory instability. Furthermore, both anterolateral extra articular procedures in addition to ACLR lead to reduced ACL re-rupture rates compared to isolated ACLR. Moreover, ALLR results in reduced ACL re-rupture rates, compared to LET. More research is needed to compare the two respective extra-articular procedures.

Tibial slope correction combined with second revision ACLR grants good clinical outcomes and prevents graft rupture at 7-15-year follow-up

PURPOSE

To update previously published outcomes (at 2-8 years) of second revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) combined with tibial deflexion osteotomy (TDO), after an interval of 5 more years (at 7-15 years), and monitor evolution of clinical scores and progression of osteoarthritis.

METHODS

The initial retrospective consecutive series included nine patients that underwent one-stage second revision ACLR with TDO, all of whom were contacted for second follow-up at minimum 7 years. An independent observer collected IKDC-SKF, the Lysholm score, and assessed radiographs for signs of osteoarthritis.

RESULTS

Of the nine original patients, seven were assessed at the clinic, one could only be assessed by telephone, and one was lost to follow-up. At final follow-up of 9.9 ± 3.0 years, the eight patients assessed maintained or improved clinical scores, compared to the previous follow-up at 4.0 ± 2.9 years. The mean Lysholm score improved from 73.8 ± 5.8 (65-82) to 84.5 ± 11.9 (59-95), and IKDC improved from 71.6 ± 6.2 (62-79) to 82.9 ± 12.1 (61-98). Of the three patients that had signs of arthritis at the previous follow-up, the stage of osteoarthritis increased in one (from grade 2 to grade 3), remained unchanged in one, and could not be assessed in one.

CONCLUSION

At 7-15 years following second revision ACLR with TDO, patients maintained or improved clinical scores compared to the previous follow-up at 2-8 years, without retears or reoperations. Although eight of the nine knees had meniscectomies or meniscal sutures, osteoarthritis progressed in only one of the six knees that had signs of arthritis at the previous follow-up. These results confirm that TDO can protect the ACL graft from retear, with minimal progression of osteoarthritis and/or risks of meniscal tears, suggesting that correction of excessive tibial slope should be considered when performing ACLR, whether a revision or primary procedure.

Restoring rotational stability following anterior cruciate ligament surgery: single-bundle reconstruction combined with lateral extra-articular tenodesis versus double-bundle reconstruction

Aim: To compare the outcomes of patients who underwent single-bundle (SB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction combined with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) with the outcomes of those who underwent double-bundle (DB) ACL reconstruction. Methods: 16 patients who underwent ACL hamstring SB reconstruction combined with LET (Coker-Arnold modification of the MacIntosh procedure) were retrospectively compared with 20 patients who underwent hamstring DB reconstruction at an average follow-up of 6.2 years. Assessment included Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee scores, objective examination and instrumented laxity test. Results: No complications were reported. Mean Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee scores significantly increased from preoperatively (p < 0.05). No differences were reported between the two groups with regard to point scales, anterior tibial translation and pivot-shift test (p = not significant). Conclusions: Both DB ACL reconstruction and combined LET and autologous hamstring SB ACL reconstruction are effective at providing satisfying functional outcomes and restoring rotational stability.

Resultado funcional do procedimento de tenodese extra-articular lateral (TEL) como complemento à reconstrução do ligamento cruzado anterior: Uma metanálise

Objectives  The aim of the present study is to systematically review and analyze the functional outcome of lateral extraarticular tenodesis (LET) procedure in addition to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in studies with a high level of evidence.

Methods  We performed a literature search for clinical studies comparing the LET method as an augmentation to ACL reconstruction with ACL reconstruction alone. The primary outcomes were the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, the Lysholm score, and graft failures. Continuous variables were reported as means and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results  Six clinical studies with 1,049 patients were included in the metaanalysis. The follow-up period was, in average, 24 months (range, 6–63 months). The addition of the LET procedure to ACLR results in better functional outcome based on the IKDC score ( p  < 0.05). Graft failure was found to be lower in the ACLR plus LET group (16 of 342 patients) compared with the ACLR-only group (46 of 341 patients) ( p  < 0.05).

Conclusion  There is high-level evidence that LET procedure in addition to ACLR is preferable in terms of functional outcome and graft failure.

Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Combined With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Effective in Knees With Additional Features of Lateral, Hyperextension, or Increased Rotational Laxity: A Matched Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To investigate the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and graft survival of combined anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and lateral extra-articular tenodesis (ACLR-LET) compared with a matched cohort having ACLR alone.

METHODS

Patients were retrospectively recruited from a consecutive series of primary ACLR-LET, between 1996 and 2015, with a minimum postsurgical time of 4 years. ACLR-LET were matched with isolated ACLR for age, gender, and operation year. The indications for adding lateral extra-articular tenodesis were lateral laxity of grade 1 or 2, hyperextension laxity, and/or increased rotational laxity of 5° to 10°. The technique used involved detaching a strip of iliotibial band proximally, before being passed deep to the lateral collateral ligament, looped through Kaplan's fibers, and sutured back onto itself at physiological tension. The PROMs used were the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Tegner Activity Scale, Oxford Knee Score, and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Failure was defined as graft rupture. Student's t-test was used to compare the matched groups and Kaplan-Meier analysis for survivorship.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients had ACLR-LET between 1996 and 2015. Nine revision cases and 2 with less than 4 years follow-up were excluded. The remaining 72 ACLR-LET patients were matched and included in the survival analysis. Seventy percent of patients completed the PROMs. In both groups, 76% were males, and the mean age was 25 years (standard deviation ± 8.5). The median follow-up was 10 years (interquartile range, 6.7 years). There was no significant change of PROMs (Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale: P = .82, 95% confidence interval (CI) -13 to 11; International Knee Documentation Committee: P = .07, CI -1 to 24; Oxford Knee Score: P = .5, CI -8 to 4; Tegner Activity Scale: P = .5, CI -1 to 3) between the groups. The pre- to postoperative PROMs, except the Tegner Activity Scale, improved significantly, clinically and statistically. There was no statistically significant difference in graft failure between the ACLR-LET group (n = 4, 5%) and the ACLR group (n = 9, 11%) (log-rank P = .099).

CONCLUSION

ACLR-LET shows good graft survival and PROMs in a high-risk population. This suggests that lateral extra-articular tenodesis is an effective technique to restore joint stability to a knee with additional features of laxity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, matched cohort study.

There are differences in knee stability based on lateral extra-articular augmentation technique alongside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

The purpose of the current study is to systematically review and network meta-analyze the current evidence in the literature to ascertain if there is a superior lateral extra-articular augmentation technique in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACL.R) with respect to knee stability, re-rupture rates and functional outcomes.

METHODS

The literature search was performed based on the PRISMA guidelines. Cohort studies comparing ACL.R to ACL.R + lateral extra-articular augmentation were included. Lateral extra-articular techniques included were anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALL.R), Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire, Losee, Maraccaci, and McIntosh. Clinical outcomes were compared between ACL.R alone and the different lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques using a frequentist approach to network meta-analysis, with statistical analysis performed using R. The treatment options were ranked using the P-Score.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies with a total of 2990 patients were included. ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold technique had the highest P-Score for ACL re-ruptures and residual pivot-shift. ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire, and ALL.R all significantly reduced the rate of ACL re-rupture, and residual pivot-shift, compared to ACL.R alone. There was no significant difference between any of the lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques and ACL.R alone. ALL.R had the highest P-Score for return to play, and return to play at pre-injury level.

CONCLUSION

This study established that ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire and ALL.R resulted in significantly lower ipsilateral ACL re-ruptures, as well as reduced pivot-shift, compared to ACL.R alone. Whereas, the other lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques did not reduce pivot-shift and re-rupture. Additionally, functional outcomes and return to play were comparable between those who underwent ACL.R and lateral extra-articular augmentation and ACL.R alone.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Clinical Outcomes of Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction or Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Combined With Primary ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Residual rotational instability after isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has been a challenge for many years. Anterolateral extra-articular procedures (AEAPs), including anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) or lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET), are performed as a surgical option for additional rotational stability, but clear evidence for their usefulness is lacking.

PURPOSE

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature regarding the efficacy of AEAP in primary ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A literature search, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted by 2 independent reviewers. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched in April 2020, following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A total of 3444 studies were screened, and 20 studies (11 randomized controlled trials and 9 nonrandomized studies) were evaluated. Functional outcomes, stability, and complications were compared between patients who underwent primary ACLR with AEAP and those who underwent isolated primary ACLR. For subgroup analysis, outcomes were compared according to AEAP technique (ALLR vs LET) and time from injury to surgery (≤12 vs >12 months). The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, Jadad scale, and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Compared with isolated ACLR, combined ACLR with AEAP led to improved pivot-shift grades and graft failure rates, regardless of the AEAP technique or of time from injury to surgery. A limited, marginal improvement in subjective function score was observed in patients who underwent AEAP combined with ACLR. In contrast to ALLR, patients who underwent LET combined with ACLR had an increased risk of knee stiffness and adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Our review suggests that when there is a need to improve rotational stability and subjective function, AEAP combined with primary ACLR can be considered regardless of time from injury. ALLR appeared to be a better option for improving rotational stability compared with LET.

Supplementary Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis for Residual Anterolateral Rotatory Instability in Patients Undergoing Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background:

The combination of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) with primary single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) remains controversial.

Purpose:

To determine whether the combination of LET with single-bundle ACLR provides greater control of anterolateral rotatory instability and improved clinical outcomes compared with ACLR alone.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods:

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched between inception and July 1, 2020. Level 1 or 2 randomized controlled trials that compared isolated single-bundle ACLR with combined LET with ACLR were included. Data were meta-analyzed for the primary outcome measure of knee stability and the secondary outcome measures of patient-reported outcome scores, return to sports, and graft failure. Dichotomous variables were presented as relative risks (RRs), and continuous variables were presented as mean differences (MDs) and standardized MDs (SMDs).

Results:

A total of 6 studies involving 1010 patients were included. Pooled data showed that the ACLR+LET group had a lower incidence of the pivot shift (RR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.45 to 0.69]; P < .00001), a higher postoperative activity level (MD, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.15 to 0.78]; P = .004), and a lower risk of graft failure (RR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.21 to 0.59]; P < .00001) than did the ACLR group. However, there were no statistically significant differences in primary outcomes including positive Lachman test findings (RR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.48 to 1.21]; P = .26) or side-to-side differences (SMD, –0.43 [95% CI, –0.95 to 0.09]; P = .11) or in secondary outcomes including International Knee Documentation Committee scores (SMD, 0.25 [95% CI, –0.06 to 0.56]; P = .11) or Lysholm scores (SMD, 0.28 [95% CI, –0.06 to 0.62]; P = .11). Although the overall rate of return to sports was not significantly different between the groups (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.03]; P = .33), the activity level was higher in the ACLR+LET group.

Conclusion:

The addition of LET to primary single-bundle ACLR produced greater knee stability, a higher activity level, and a lower incidence of graft failure than did ACLR alone. There may be a role for adding LET to ACLR for the treatment of ACL injuries.

Return to Play After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with Extra-Articular Augmentation: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The purpose of the current study is to systematically review the current evidence in the literature to ascertain rates of return to play after ACLR with extra-articular augmentation (EA).

METHODS

A literature search was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were included if they evaluated and reported on return to play after ACLR + EA; case studies and review articles were excluded. The outcomes measured focused on (1) return to play, (2) return to play at the same or higher level, and (3) timing of return to play. Qualitative analysis and quantitative analysis were performed using SPSS.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 studies met our inclusion criteria. Among patients undergoing primary ACLR, 82.8% to 100% were able to return to play, with 64% to 100% able to return at the same or higher level of play. All professional athletes were able to return to play, and 85.7% to 100% were able to return to the same level of preoperative play. The mean time to return was 5 to 11 months in those undergoing primary ACLR + EA. Among those undergoing revision ACLR, 50% to 88.4% were able to return to play, with 41.5% to 77.8% able to return at the same or higher level of play. None of the 5 studies that compared rate of return to play (at any level) between ACLR + EA and ACLR alone found a significant difference between them. However, among the 6 studies that compared rate of return to play at the same level between ACLR + EA and ACLR alone, 2 studies found a significantly higher rate of return to play with ACLR + EA.

CONCLUSION

ACLR + EA resulted in high levels of return to play in those undergoing either primary or revision ACLR. Additionally, comparative studies of patients undergoing primary ACLR with or without EA reported similarly high rates of return to play.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of level I to IV studies.

Adding a modified Lemaire procedure to ACLR in knees with severe rotational knee instability does not compromise isokinetic muscle recovery at the time of return-to-play

Purpose

To determine whether isokinetic muscle recovery following ACLR using a hamstring tendon (HT) would be equivalent (non-inferior) in knees that had high-grade pivot-shift and adjuvant modified Lemaire procedure versus knees that had minimal pivot-shift and no adjuvant modified Lemaire procedure.

Methods

We evaluated 96 consecutive patients that underwent primary ACLR. Nine were excluded because of contralateral knee injury, and of the remaining 87, ACLR was performed stand-alone in 52 (Reference group), and with a Lemaire procedure in 35 (Lemaire group) who had high-grade pivot-shift, age < 18, or genu recurvatum > 20°. At 6 months, isokinetic tests were performed at 240°/s and 90°/s to calculate strength deficits of hamstrings (H) and quadriceps (Q). At 8 months, patients were evaluated using IKDC, Lysholm, and Tegner scores.

Results

Compared to the Reference group, the Lemaire group were younger (23.0 ± 2.5 vs 34.2 ± 10.5, p = 0.021) with a greater proportion of males (80% vs 56%, p < 0.001). The Lemaire group had no complications, but the Reference group had one graft failure and one cyclops syndrome. Strength deficits at 240°/s and at 90°/s were similar in both groups, but mixed H/Q ratios were lower for the Lemaire group (1.02 ± 0.19 vs 1.14 ± 0.24, p = 0.011). IKDC and Lysholm scores were similar in both groups, but Tegner scores were higher in the Lemaire group (median, 6.5 vs 6.0, p = 0.024).

Conclusions

ACLR with a modified Lemaire procedure for knees with rotational instability grants equivalent isokinetic muscle recovery as stand-alone ACLR in knees with no rotational instability. For ACL-deficient knees with high-grade pivot-shift, a Lemaire procedure restores rotational stability without compromising isokinetic muscle recovery.

Study design

Level III, comparative study.

Comparative clinical outcomes of anterolateral ligament reconstruction versus lateral extra-articular tenodesis in combination with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anterolateral augmentation procedures can be divided into traditional lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and modern anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction. Nevertheless, no studies have compared the clinical results between LET and ALL reconstruction, when combined with intra-articular ACL reconstruction. This study was therefore designed to compare the clinical results, including the anterior translation, rotational laxity, and patient-reported outcomes, in a group of patients who underwent ACL reconstruction combined with LET or ALL reconstruction.

METHODS

All studies systematically searched until March 2018 without any language restriction that reported the results of a lateral extra-articular stabilization procedure using either LET or ALL reconstruction methods combined with ACL reconstruction were evaluated. Two reviewers independently recorded data from each study, including the sample size, improvement in Lysholm score, and the number of patients with each grade of knee laxity using Lachman and pivot shift tests.

RESULTS

The pooled results of ten studies showed that the postoperative proportion of knees with grade 2 or 3 on the Lachman test was significantly higher following LET compared with ALL reconstruction in combination with ACL reconstruction (10.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.6-17.1% vs. 1.5%, 95% CI 0.5-4.5%; p = 0.001). However, the pooled results of 12 studies showed that the proportion of knees that belonged to grade 2 or 3 on the pivot shift test, indicating poor rotational stability, was similar between these two techniques (4.9%, 95% CI 2.0-11.5% vs. 2.3%, 95% CI 1.1-4.5%; p = 0.101). The pooled improvements in Lysholm scores in these two groups were also similar (32.3, 95% CI 26.8-37.9 vs. 25.7, 95% CI 16.7-34.7, p = 0.218).

CONCLUSION

LET could lead to worse anterior instability than with ALL reconstruction when these two approaches were combined with single-bundle ACL reconstruction. However, rotational stability and patient-reported outcomes were similar between the techniques.

No Difference in Functional Outcomes When Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Is Added to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Young Active Patients: The Stability Study

PURPOSE

To assess the functional outcomes of patients included in the Stability Study randomized controlled trial comparing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) alone with ACLR with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively.

METHODS

Six hundred eighteen patients undergoing ACLR, all under the age of 25 years either returning to contact pivoting sport or displaying signs of high-grade rotatory laxity or generalized ligamentous laxity, were randomly assigned to receive ACLR alone or ACLR plus LET. A total of 356 of these patients were randomized at centers participating in the functional assessments. Our primary outcome was Limb Symmetry Index, calculated using a series of 4-hop tests at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Secondary outcome measures included pain, patient-reported function, and isokinetic strength testing.

RESULTS

We found no statistically significant difference in the proportion of patients either unwilling or unfit to complete the hop testing in the ACLR alone or ACLR with LET group at 6 months (40 vs 40 respectively; P = 1.00), 12 months (25 vs 27; P = .76), and 24 months (21 vs 23; P = .87). Of those who completed hop testing, there were no statistically significant differences between groups in Limb Symmetry Index at 6, 12, or 24 months. Self-reported function (Lower Extremity Functional Score) significantly favored the ACLR alone group at 3 (P = .01) and 6 months (P = .02) postoperative but was similar by 12 months postoperative. Pain scores (P4) also showed a statistically significant difference in favor of the ACL alone group, but this also resolved by 6 months. Quadriceps peak torque (P = .03) and average power (P = .01) were also significantly different in favor of the ACLR alone group at 6 months postoperative; however, these were similar between groups by 12 months postoperative (P = .11 and P = .32, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of a LET to ACLR results in slightly increased pain, a mild reduction in quadriceps strength, and reduced subjective functional recovery up to 6 months postoperatively. However, these differences do not have any impact on objective function as measured by hop test limb symmetry index.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I, Randomized Controlled Trial.

[Research progress in anterolateral ligament of knee]

Objective

To review research progress in the anterolateral ligament (ALL) of knee, and provide a clinical reference for diagnosis and treatment of ALL injury.

Methods

The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of ALL injury was widely reviewed. The incidence, anatomy, biomechanics, injury mechanism, and treatment status of ALL were summarized.

Results

The ALL contributes to the effect of controlling the internal rotation and anterior translation of the tibia, which affects the axial migration of the knee. ALL injury can be diagnosed according to the signs and MRI examination. Currently, no consensus exists for the surgical indications of ALL injury, but most surgeons tend to perform ALL reconstruction in patients requiring anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction or revision surgery with higher pivot-shift tests. At present, various techniques have been used for ALL reconstruction, and there is no optimal technique. In addition, the long-term effectiveness of ALL reconstruction is unclear due to the lack of high-quality studies and long-term postoperative follow-up.

Conclusion

The ALL contributes to maintaining knee stability, and the ALL reconstruction technique and its effectiveness still need further research.

Lateral extra-articular tenodesis with ACL reconstruction demonstrates better patient-reported outcomes compared to ACL reconstruction alone at 2 years minimum follow-up

PURPOSE

The role for extra-articular procedures in addition to ACL reconstruction to restore rotational stability is debated. We use lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LEAT) for patients that meet criteria. Our null hypothesis was that there would be no difference between two groups of patients that were treated with ACL reconstruction alone or ACL reconstruction with LEAT according to criteria.

METHODS

A prospectively collected database of patients that were treated primarily according to the presence of a high-grade pivot shift with LEAT at the time of ACL reconstruction was propensity-matched with a group of patients that underwent ACL reconstruction alone. Minimum follow-up was 2 years. Stratified variable analysis of the groups was also performed.

RESULTS

There were 218 and 55 patients in the ACL reconstruction group and ACL reconstruction with LEAT group, respectively. There were 125 patients and 46 patients after propensity matching with a median follow-up of 52 months and 27 months, respectively. Post-operative Lysholm score (P = 0.005), Tegner activity index (P = 0.003) and time to return to sport (P < 0.001) favoured ACL reconstruction with LEAT compared to ACL reconstruction alone. Sports with frequent change of direction maneuvers and higher rates of ACL injury (rugby, soccer, skiing) favoured ACL reconstruction with LEAT versus ACL reconstruction alone (P = 0.001). No significant difference in re-operation rate or type of surgery was found between the two surgical groups after propensity matching but 13 patients in the ACL reconstruction-only group re-injured their ACL, 8 of whom required supplementary LEAT at the time of revision surgery.

CONCLUSION

Patient-reported outcomes and return to multi-directional sports after ACL reconstruction favour LEAT at the time of ACL reconstruction when narrow inclusion criteria are applied.

Lateral Augmentation Procedures in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Anatomic, Biomechanical, Imaging, and Clinical Evidence

BACKGROUND

There has been an increasing interest in lateral-based soft tissue reconstructive techniques as augments to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The objective of these procedures is to minimize anterolateral rotational instability of the knee after surgery. Despite the relatively rapid increase in surgical application of these techniques, many clinical questions remain.

PURPOSE

To provide a comprehensive update on the current state of these lateral-based augmentation procedures by reviewing the origins of the surgical techniques, the biomechanical data to support their use, and the clinical results to date.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was conducted via the Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, SportDiscus, and CINAHL databases. The search was designed to encompass the literature on lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) procedures and the anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction. Titles and abstracts were reviewed for relevance and sorted into the following categories: anatomy, biomechanics, imaging/diagnostics, surgical techniques, and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

The search identified 4016 articles. After review for relevance, 31, 53, 27, 35, 45, and 78 articles described the anatomy, biomechanics, imaging/diagnostics, surgical techniques, and clinical outcomes of either LET procedures or the ALL reconstruction, respectively. A multitude of investigations were available, revealing controversy in addition to consensus in several categories. The level of evidence obtained from this search was not adequate for systematic review or meta-analysis; thus, a current concepts review of the anatomy, biomechanics, imaging, surgical techniques, and clinical outcomes was performed.

CONCLUSION

Histologically, the ALL appears to be a distinct structure that can be identified with advanced imaging techniques. Biomechanical evidence suggests that the anterolateral structures of the knee, including the ALL, contribute to minimizing anterolateral rotational instability. Cadaveric studies of combined ACLR-LET procedures demonstrated overconstraint of the knee; however, these findings have yet to be reproduced in the clinical literature. The current indications for LET augmentation in the setting of ACLR and the effect on knee kinematic and joint preservation should be the subject of future research.

Influence of anterolateral ligament injuries on stability and second-look arthroscopic findings after allograft transtibial anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of anterolateral ligament (ALL) injuries on stability and second-look arthroscopic findings after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

METHODS

One-hundred and nineteen consecutive patients underwent a second-look arthroscopic surgery after ACL reconstruction and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examination of the ALL. The patients were divided into an ALL intact group (n = 39) and ALL injured group (n = 80). The ALL injuries were divided according to the three anatomical parts of the ALL (femoral, meniscal, and tibial) using MRI evaluation. Stability and clinical results were evaluated using the Lachman test, pivot-shift test, KT-2000 arthrometer, and Lysholm score. On second-look arthroscopy, graft tension and synovial coverage were evaluated.

RESULTS

The clinical evaluation revealed no significant differences in ALL injury. Although the synovial coverages showed no significant difference (P = 0.113), the second-look arthroscopic findings indicated that tension was statistically significantly dependent on the ALL injury (P < 0.001). In addition, according to the location of the ALL injury, femoral, tibial, and combined ALL injuries showed significant differences in graft tension as compared with the ALL intact group; only the meniscal injuries had no effect on graft tension.

CONCLUSION

Combined ACL and ALL injuries showed poor graft tension in the second-look arthroscopic findings after allograft transtibial ACL reconstruction, even though no significant differences in clinical outcomes and stability were observed.

Passive anterior tibia translation in anterior cruciate ligament-injured, anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed and healthy knees: a systematic review

Abstract

Anterior tibia translation (ATT) is mainly prevented by the anterior cruciate ligament. Passive ATT tests are commonly used to diagnose an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, to select patients for an ACL reconstruction (ACLR), and as an outcome measure after an ACLR. The aim of this review was to present an overview of possible factors determining ATT. A second purpose was to give a summary of the ATT measured in the literature in healthy, ACL-injured and ACLR knees and a comparison between those groups. A literature search was conducted with PubMed. Inclusion criteria were full-text primary studies published in English between January 2006 and October 2016. Studies included reported ATT in explicit data in healthy as well as ACL-injured or ACLR knees or in ACL-injured as well as ACLR knees. Sixty-one articles met inclusion criteria. Two articles measured the ATT in healthy as well as ACL-injured knees, 51 in ACL-injured as well as in ACLR knees, three in ACLR as well as in healthy knees and three in healthy, ACL-injured and ACLR knees. A difference in ATT is found between healthy, contralateral, ACLR and ACL-injured knees and between chronic and acute ACL injury. Graft choices and intra-articular injuries are factors which could affect the ATT. The mean ATT was lowest to highest in ACLR knees using a bone–patella tendon–bone autograft, ACLR knees using a hamstring autograft, contralateral healthy knees, healthy knees, ACLR knees with an allograft and ACL-injured knees. Factors which could affect the ATT are graft choice, ACL injury or reconstruction, intra-articular injuries and whether an ACL injury is chronic or acute. Comparison of ATT between studies should be taken with caution as a high number of different measurement methods are used. To be able to compare studies, more consistency in measuring devices used should be introduced to measuring ATT. The clinical relevance is that an autograft ACLR might give better results than an allograft ACLR as knee laxity is greater when using an allograft tendon.

Level of evidence

III.

Outcomes of Physeal-Sparing ACL Reconstruction with Iliotibial Band Autograft in Skeletally Immature Prepubescent Children

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears are occurring in youth athletes with increasing frequency. Many ACL reconstruction procedures designed to allow for continued growth in patients with open physes have been described, but large series with mid- to long-term outcomes data are lacking. The purpose of the current study was to assess the clinical outcomes of a large cohort of prepubescent children who underwent a physeal-sparing, combined intra- and extra-articular ACL reconstruction with iliotibial (IT) band autograft over a 23-year period.

METHODS

Included in our analysis were 237 patients (240 knees) who underwent ACL reconstruction using IT band autograft at Tanner stage 1 or 2 (mean age of 11.2 ± 1.7 years). Physical examination data were analyzed for 225 of the 240 knees (mean follow-up, 25.8 months), and 137 (57%) of the knees had corresponding patient-reported clinical outcomes (patient-reported graft rupture and Pediatric International Knee Documentation Committee [Pedi-IKDC], Tegner activity scale, and Lysholm scores; mean follow-up, 6.2 years). Rates of growth arrest, IT band graft-harvest morbidity, and return to sports were analyzed.

RESULTS

Physical examination revealed that 96.8% of the knees were grade A on the Lachman test and 98.8% were grade A on the pivot-shift test. Graft rupture occurred in 9 (6.6%) of 137 knees, at an average of 33.5 months (range, 8.2 months to 8.0 years) postoperatively. For patients who did not sustain a graft rupture, the mean Pedi-IKDC score was 93.3 ± 11.0, the mean Lysholm score was 93.4 ± 9.9, and the mean score on the Tegner activity scale was 7.8 (mode, 7). While lateral thigh asymmetry at the IT band harvest site was noted by 48% of the subjects, only 1.6% reported associated pain. No cases of limb-length discrepancy or angular deformity were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

This procedure was associated with excellent functional outcomes, minimal risk of growth disturbance, and a low graft-rupture rate in skeletally immature prepubescent children. These results appear durable at mid- to long-term follow-up, at an average of >6 years postoperatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Anatomic All-Inside Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using the TransLateral Technique

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is a commonly performed procedure and considered to be the gold standard in restoring knee function and stability in ACL-deficient knees. The TransLateral all-inside technique implies the use of only two portals – anterolateral and anteromedial, without the use of an accessory portal. The work is done using the lateral portal, while the medial portal serves as a viewing site. Only a few studies have been published regarding the assessment of the functional and clinical outcomes of this novel technique.

Aim of the study: To determine the clinical effectiveness of the TransLateral procedure used for ACL reconstruction and its ability to re-establish joint functionality and stability in ACL-deficient knees.

Material and methods: A prospective study was conducted at the Orthopedics and Traumatology Clinic no. 2 in Tîrgu Mureș. Thirty-two patients matched our inclusion criteria and were operated using the TransLateral technique for ACL reconstruction. Outcome assessment was performed using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Lysholm score and the Tegner Activity Scale. The questionnaires include items referring to pain, physical functioning, sports activities, and quality of life. Operative time and ACL graft size were also documented.

Results: All patients underwent single-bundle ACL restoration using a quadrupled semitendinosus tendon. Out of 32 patients, 21 had associated meniscus lesions and 8 collateral ligament injuries. Mean graft diameter was 8.7 mm and mean length 63.2 mm. Significantly improved KOOS values were found at 12 months post-surgery regarding the mean baseline score: 59.3 ± 5.3 vs. 95.3 ± 4.9, p <0.0001. The Lysholm score improved from a mean of 56.3 ± 4.9 to 93.9 ± 5.6, p <0.0001 at the end-point. The Tegner activity scale ranged from 3.8 ± 1.9 to 5.9 ± 2.4, p <0.0001 at the final follow-up.

Conclusions: The TransLateral technique proved its clinical effectiveness and its ability to restore knee stability after ACL reconstruction surgery.

Role of anterolateral reconstruction in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

There is renewed interest in anterolateral reconstruction (ALR) for patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This is the result of isolated ACL reconstruction and double-bundle reconstruction providing inadequate control over the pivot shift, and recent anatomical and biomechanical studies on the anterolateral ligament (ALL) and its role in the knee's rotational stability. From a technical point of view, ALR can be performed either as a continuity of the intra-articular ACL reconstruction or an independent procedure. The typical peripheral grafts (gracilis and semitendinosus tendons, iliotibial band) can be used. The femoral tunnel must be posterior and proximal to the lateral epicondyle, and the tibial tunnel on a line joining Gerdy's tubercle with the ALL's tibial insertion. Tensioning and fixation are done with the knee near full extension and the tibia in neutral rotation. The ALR complication rate reported in older studies (pain, hematoma, scar damage) has been reduced. Relative to isolated ACL reconstruction, ALR does not alter the infection or stiffness rate, and it reduces the re-injury rate and secondary meniscal damage rate. Analysis of the literature has not shown an increased rate of osteoarthritis after ALR. The objective and functional outcomes are equal to those after isolated ACL reconstruction. Control over rotation is improved by adding ALR and the return to pivot sports appears to be more successful. While the indications must still be refined, ALR can be proposed to young patients undergoing ACL reconstruction who participate in high-intensity pivot sports, have a high-grade pivot shift or who have a failed ACL reconstruction.

Clinical outcomes of extra-articular tenodesis/anterolateral reconstruction in the ACL injured knee

PURPOSE

The role of concomitant extra-articular procedures in improving the outcome of ACL reconstruction has experienced a recent resurgence in interest. The aim of this article is to highlight the differences in philosophies and outcomes of historical lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and contemporary, anterolateral reconstruction.

METHODS

A narrative review was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE using the keywords "lateral extra-articular tenodesis" and "anterolateral ligament reconstruction".

RESULTS

Results of search strategy: Thirty-seven studies [13 reporting clinical outcomes of isolated LET in ACL deficient knees and 24 comparing isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with ACLR + LET] and 1 study on anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction were identified as relevant and included in the review. Results of literature review: Isolated extra-articular reconstructions are rarely performed in contemporary practice. They are associated with a high rate of persistent anterior instability and early degenerative change. Combined ACL reconstruction and lateral extra-articular tenodeses results in a significant reduction in the prevalence of residual pivot shift, but the majority of the studies do not demonstrate any significant difference with respect to patient-reported outcome measures and return to sport. Although several authors report a trend towards decreased graft rupture rates, significant differences were not demonstrated in most studies. In a single clinical study, combined anatomic ACL and anterolateral ligament reconstruction was reported to be associated with a threefold reduction in graft rupture rates and improved return to sport compared to isolated ACL graft choices.

CONCLUSIONS

Historically performed, combined ACL reconstruction and lateral extra-articular tenodeses are associated with improved knee kinematics. Although trends towards decreased graft rupture rates are reported by several authors, the majority did not demonstrate a significant difference, likely as a result of small and underpowered studies using post-operative immobilisation and delayed rehabilitation protocols. More recently, combined ACLR and ALL reconstruction has been shown to be associated with significant improvements in graft failure and return to sport rates when compared to isolated ACLR. However, these results are from a single clinical series with only medium-term follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Anterolateral Tenodesis or Anterolateral Ligament Complex Reconstruction: Effect of Flexion Angle at Graft Fixation When Combined With ACL Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Despite numerous technical descriptions of anterolateral procedures, knowledge is limited regarding the effect of knee flexion angle during graft fixation.

PURPOSE

To determine the effect of knee flexion angle during graft fixation on tibiofemoral joint kinematics for a modified Lemaire tenodesis or an anterolateral ligament (ALL) complex reconstruction combined with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Twelve cadaveric knees were mounted in a test rig with kinematics recorded from 0° to 90° flexion. Loads applied to the tibia were 90-N anterior translation, 5-N·m internal tibial rotation, and combined 90-N anterior force and 5-N·m internal rotation. Intact, ACL-deficient, and combined ACL plus anterolateral-deficient states were tested, and then ACL reconstruction was performed and testing was repeated. Thereafter, modified Lemaire tenodeses and ALL procedures with graft fixation at 0°, 30°, and 60° of knee flexion and 20-N graft tension were performed combined with the ACL reconstruction, and repeat testing was performed throughout. Repeated-measures analysis of variance and Bonferroni-adjusted t tests were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In combined ACL and anterolateral deficiency, isolated ACL reconstruction left residual laxity for both anterior translation and internal rotation. Anterior translation was restored for all combinations of ACL and anterolateral procedures. The combined ACL reconstruction and ALL procedure restored intact knee kinematics when the graft was fixed in full extension, but when the graft was fixed in 30° and 60°, the combined procedure left residual laxity in internal rotation ( P = .043). The combined ACL reconstruction and modified Lemaire procedure restored internal rotation regardless of knee flexion angle at graft fixation. When the combined ACL reconstruction and lateral procedure states were compared with the ACL-only reconstructed state, a significant reduction in internal rotation laxity was seen with the modified Lemaire tenodesis but not with the ALL procedure.

CONCLUSION

In a knee with combined ACL and anterolateral ligament injuries, the modified Lemaire tenodesis combined with ACL reconstruction restored normal laxities at all angles of flexion for graft fixation (0°, 30°, or 60°), with 20 N of tension. The combined ACL and ALL procedure restored intact knee kinematics when tensioned in full extension.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In combined anterolateral procedure plus intra-articular ACL reconstruction, the knee flexion angle is important when fixing the graft. A modified Lemaire procedure restored intact knee laxities when fixation was performed at 0°, 30°, or 60° of flexion. The ALL procedure restored normal laxities only when fixation occurred in full extension.

Ropivacaine alters the mechanical properties of hamstring tendons: In vitro controlled mechanical testing of tendons from living donors

OBJECTIVE

Intraarticular or periarticular injection of ropivacaine (RI) is an element of current knee surgery practices. The goal of this study was to determine the effects of RI on the mechanical properties of hamstring tendons. We hypothesized that RI would have a detrimental effect on the mechanical properties of periarticular soft tissues METHODS: A tensile test to failure was performed on 120 hamstring tendon segments harvested during ACL reconstruction surgery in 120 patients. Two sets of tensile tests were done. The first evaluated the effect of RI itself on the mechanical properties of tendons: 30 samples were soaked for 1hour in a 2% RI solution and compared to 30 samples soaked in a saline solution (control group). The second evaluated the effect of RI concentration on the mechanical properties of hamstring tendons: 30 samples were soaked for 1hour in a 2% RI solution and 30 samples were soaked in a 7.5% RI solution.

RESULTS

In the first test, 29 samples from each group were analyzed as two samples (one in each group) failed at the grip interface. The specimens exposed to 2% RI had lower ultimate tensile strength (Δ=4.4MPa, P=0.001), strain energy (Δ=13MPa, P=0.001) and Young's modulus (Δ=1.6MPa, P=0.02) than the specimens in the control group. There was no significant difference in the strain at failure between groups (Δ=5%, P=0.3). In the second test, one specimen from the 7.5% RI group failed during the preloading and was excluded. There was no significant difference in terms of the load at failure and ultimate tensile stress (Δ=0.45MPa, P=0.6) and strain energy (Δ=0.49MPa, P=0.49) between the two groups. There were significant differences in terms of elongation at failure (Δ=28%, P=0.0003) and Young's modulus (Δ=2.6MPa, P=0.005), with the specimens exposed to 7.5% RI undergoing greater deformation and having a lower Young's modulus.

DISCUSSION

While local RI injections are widely performed in clinical practice, the results of this in vitro study point to short-term alterations of the mechanical properties of hamstring tendons. If these results hold in vivo, this could lead to weakness of the soft tissues exposed to this product, particularly the tendons and ligaments around the injection area.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Experimental study. Level 1.

The Role of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis and Best-Evidence Synthesis

Background

The role of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LEAT) to augment primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains controversial.

Purpose

To determine whether the addition of LEAT to primary ACLR provides greater control of rotational laxity and improves clinical outcomes compared with ACLR alone and to assess the impact of early versus delayed ACLR.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Two reviewers independently searched 7 databases for randomized and nonrandomized clinical studies comparing ACLR plus LEAT versus ACLR alone. Animal, cadaveric, and biomechanical studies; revision or repair procedures; and studies using synthetic ligaments and multiligamentous-injured knees were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed with a modified Downs and Black checklist. The primary outcome was postoperative pivot shift. These data were pooled by use of a fixed-effects meta-analysis model. The studies were divided into delayed (>12 months) and early (≤12 months) reconstruction groups for meta-analysis. A best-evidence synthesis was performed on the remaining outcome measures.

Results

Of 387 titles identified, 11 articles were included (5 of high quality). Meta-analysis of postoperative pivot shift in 3 studies of delayed primary ACLR showed a statistically significant difference for the pivot-shift test in favor of ACLR with LEAT (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-0.81; P = .008; I² = 0). Meta-analysis of 5 studies of early primary ACLR found no statistically significant difference with the addition of LEAT (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.33-1.09; P = .10; I² = 33%). Insufficient evidence was available to determine whether the addition of LEAT had any effect on clinical, objective, subjective, and functional outcomes.

Conclusion

In primary ACLR, no evidence is available showing additional benefit of LEAT in reducing the postoperative pivot shift in early reconstructions (≤12 months); however, LEAT may have a role in delayed ACLR. Strong evidence exists that a combined ACLR and LEAT reduces lateral femoral translation, but there is insufficient evidence to identify any benefit for other clinical outcomes.

Combined anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and lateral extra-articular tenodesis does not result in an increased rate of osteoarthritis: a systematic review and best evidence synthesis

PURPOSE

The role of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LEAT) as an augment to primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains controversial. However, concerns exist regarding the risk of development of osteoarthritis due to over constraint of the knee. To systematically review the literature to analyse the long-term incidence of osteoarthritis in patients who had an LEAT performed in isolation or in combination with intra-articular ACLR for the treatment of ACL deficiency.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently searched five databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized comparative, and retrospective cohort studies (CS) with long-term radiological follow-up of patients with ACL deficiency treated with ACLR combined with LEAT or LEAT in isolation. Risk of bias was performed using a modified Downs & Black's checklist. The primary outcome was the development of osteoarthritis. The studies were divided into those with moderate/severe osteoarthritis at between 5 to 10 years and >10-year follow-up. The rate of meniscal pathology at the time of the index surgery was recorded. A best evidence synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

Eight studies reported on 421 patients in which an LEAT procedure was carried out. There were two high-quality RCTs and six low-quality CS. The follow-up was between 5- and 10-years in 5 studies and >10-years in 3. The presence of moderate/severe osteoarthritis was not detected in three studies and was found in 4/44 (9%) and 13/70 (18.6%) patients in the other two. At 11 year follow-up, one study demonstrated no osteoarthritis, while the other two studies reported rates of 54/100 (54%) and 17/24 (71%) respectively at >24 years. In the latter two cases, the rate of meniscal pathology was >50%. A best evidence synthesis revealed that there was insufficient evidence that the addition of a LEAT to an ACLR resulted in an increased rate of osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSION

The best available evidence would suggest that the addition of a LEAT to ACLR does not result in an increase rate of osteoarthritis of the knee. In knees that have undergone a combined ACLR and LEAT, the incidence of osteoarthritis was low up to 11 years but increased thereafter. The presence of meniscal injury at the index surgery was reported to be greater predictor of the development of osteoarthritis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Biomechanical Comparison of Anterolateral Procedures Combined With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Anterolateral soft tissue structures of the knee have a role in controlling anterolateral rotational laxity, and they may be damaged at the time of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures.

PURPOSE

To compare the kinematic effects of anterolateral operative procedures in combination with intra-articular ACL reconstruction for combined ACL plus anterolateral-injured knees.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Twelve cadaveric knees were tested in a 6 degrees of freedom rig using an optical tracking system to record the kinematics through 0° to 90° of knee flexion with no load, anterior drawer, internal rotation, and combined loading. Testing was first performed in ACL-intact, ACL-deficient, and combined ACL plus anterolateral-injured (distal deep insertions of the iliotibial band and the anterolateral ligament [ALL] and capsule cut) states. Thereafter, ACL reconstruction was performed alone and in combination with the following: modified MacIntosh tenodesis, modified Lemaire tenodesis passed both superficial and deep to the lateral collateral ligament, and ALL reconstruction. Anterolateral grafts were fixed at 30° of knee flexion with both 20 and 40 N of tension. Statistical analysis used repeated-measures analyses of variance and paired t tests with Bonferroni adjustments.

RESULTS

ACL reconstruction alone failed to restore native knee kinematics in combined ACL plus anterolateral-injured knees ( P < .05 for all). All combined reconstructions with 20 N of tension, except for ALL reconstruction ( P = .002-.01), restored anterior translation. With 40 N of tension, the superficial Lemaire and MacIntosh procedures overconstrained the anterior laxity in deep flexion. Only the deep Lemaire and MacIntosh procedures-with 20 N of tension-restored rotational kinematics to the intact state ( P > .05 for all), while the ALL underconstrained and the superficial Lemaire overconstrained internal rotation. The same procedures with 40 N of tension led to similar findings.

CONCLUSION

In a combined ACL plus anterolateral-injured knee, ACL reconstruction alone failed to restore intact knee kinematics. The addition of either the deep Lemaire or MacIntosh tenodesis tensioned with 20 N, however, restored native knee kinematics.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The current study indicates that unaddressed anterolateral injuries, in the presence of an ACL deficiency, result in abnormal knee kinematics that is not restored if only treated with intra-articular ACL reconstruction. Both the modified MacIntosh and modified deep Lemaire tenodeses (with 20 N of tension) restored native knee kinematics at time zero.

The Fascia Lata Anterolateral Tenodesis Technique

A technique for anatomic reconstruction of the anterolateral complex addressing anterolateral rotatory instability both in primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and in revision cases is presented. The extra-articular reconstruction is performed with a pedicle strip of iliotibial tract, fixed on the anatomic origin and insertion points of the anterolateral ligament of the knee in a double-bundle V-shaped fashion.

Efficacy of Osteoconductive Ceramics in Bioresorbable Screws for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Prospective Intrapatient Comparative Study

Background:

Osteoconductive additives are used in resorbable interference screws for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction to improve graft incorporation and mitigate adverse effects. There are no published studies that compare biological performances of bioresorbable and biocomposite screws without artifacts due to different follow-up times and intrinsic patient characteristics.

Purpose/Hypothesis:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of osteoconductive agents in bioresorbable screws for ACL reconstruction at minimum follow-up of 2 years by intrapatient comparison. The hypothesis was that osteoconductive ceramics would result in slower resorption, improved ossification, and less tunnel widening.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods:

A total of 28 ACL reconstructions at 2 centers were randomly assigned into 2 comparable groups: (1) the graft was fixed in the tibia using standard bioresorbable screws and in the femur using biocomposite screws with osteoconductive agents (biphasic calcium phosphate), and (2) the graft was fixed in the femur using a standard bioresorbable screw and in the tibia using a biocomposite screw with osteoconductive agents.

Results:

Twenty-seven patients completed evaluations at 29.9 ± 4.0 months. Resorption was complete for more bioresorbable (81%) than biocomposite (37%) screws (P = .0029), whereas satisfactory ossification was observed in more biocomposite (52%) than bioresorbable (15%) screws (P = .0216). The tunnel shape was normal in more biocomposite (81%) than bioresorbable (48%) screws (P = .0126), and marked cortical formation was twice more frequent for biocomposite (78%) than bioresorbable (37%) screws (P = .0012). Bioresorbable screws exhibited faster resorption in the femur (P = .0202) but not in the tibia (not significant). Conversely, biocomposite screws demonstrated better ossification, less tunnel widening, and more cortical formation in the tibia (P < .0001, P = .0227, and P < .0001, respectively) but not in the femur (not significant for all).

Conclusion:

Osteoconductive additives can reduce the extent of resorption while improving ossification, reducing tunnel widening, and increasing cortical formation.

Clinical Relevance:

The benefits of osteoconductive agents justify their associated costs for ACL reconstruction, particularly in the tibia.

Biomechanical study of strength and stiffness of the knee anterolateral ligament

BACKGROUND

Recent studies clearly characterize the anatomical parameters of the knee anterolateral ligament (ALL). The potential clinical importance of this ligament is exemplified by some patients with possible combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) and ALL rupture who do not progress satisfactorily following isolated ACL reconstruction. Previous biomechanical studies have assessed the resistance parameters of the ALL in order to address potential reconstruction strategies; however, these have reported conflicting results. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the linear resistance of the ALL by means of a biomechanical study in cadaveric knees.

METHODS

Fourteen cadaveric knees were used. The ALL was dissected, and all structures that connect the femur and the tibia, except for the ALL, were sectioned. The ALL was subjected to a tensile test with the knee around 30 to 40 degrees, in a way that the ALL was aligned with the machine. The strength at the maximum resistance limit, deformation and stiffness of the ALL were evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean maximum strength of the ALL was 204.8 +/- 114.9 N. The stiffness was 41.9 +/- 25.7 N/mm and the deformation 10.3 +/- 3.5 mm.

CONCLUSION

The ALL has a mean ultimate tensile strength of 204.8 N. This suggests that simple bands of all autologous or homologous grafts commonly used in clinical practice for ligament reconstruction around the knee possess the required biomechanical resistance characteristics for ALL reconstruction.

A systematic review of single- versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction using the anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction scoring checklist

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review was to apply the anatomic ACL reconstruction scoring checklist (AARSC) and to evaluate the degree to which clinical studies comparing single-bundle (SB) and double-bundle (DB) ACL reconstructions are anatomic.

METHODS

A systematic electronic search was performed using the databases PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE and Cochrane Library. Studies published from January 1995 to January 2014 comparing SB and DB ACL reconstructions with clinical outcome measurements were included. The items from the AARSC were recorded for both the SB and DB groups in each study.

RESULTS

Eight-thousand nine-hundred and ninety-four studies were analysed, 77 were included. Randomized clinical trials (29; 38%) and prospective comparative studies (29; 38%) were the most frequent study type. Most studies were published in 2011 (19; 25%). The most commonly reported items for both SB and DB groups were as follows: graft type (152; 99%), femoral and tibial fixation method (149; 97% respectively), knee flexion angle during graft tensioning (124; 8%) and placement of the tibial tunnel at the ACL insertion site (101; 66%). The highest level of documentation used for ACL tunnel position for both groups was often one dimensional, e.g. drawing, operative notes or o'clock reference. The DB reconstruction was in general more thoroughly reported. The means for the AARSC were 6.9 ± 2.8 for the SB group and 8.3 ± 2.8 for the DB group. Both means were below a proposed required minimum score of 10 for anatomic ACL reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

There was substantial underreporting of surgical data for both the SB and DB groups in clinical studies. This underreporting creates difficulties when analysing, comparing and pooling results of scientific studies on this subject.

The anterolateral ligament of the knee: unwrapping the enigma. Anatomical study and comparison to previous reports

Background

It has been suggested that the anterolateral ligament (ALL) of the knee may have importance in limiting rotational instability, and reconstruction may prevent a continued pivot-shift following anterior cruciate ligament surgery. However, the anatomy of this ligament has not been consistently reported in recent publications. We describe our experience of cadaveric dissection with reference to other published work.

Materials and Methods

Eleven fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were dissected using a standard technique. The ALL tissue was identified with internal rotation of the tibia and varus stress. Measurements were made using a digital caliper and details of the origin and insertion were recorded.

Results

The ALL was identified in ten of the 11 cadavers. The only specimen in which it was not identified was found to also have an anterior cruciate ligament deficiency. The mean dimensions were: length 40.1 (± 5.53) mm, width 4.63 (± 1.39) mm, thickness 0.87 (± 0.18) mm. The femoral origin was posterior and proximal to the lateral collateral ligament attachment in six knees, anterior and distal in three knees, and at the same site in one knee. The tibial insertion was a mean 17.7 (± 2.95) mm from Gerdy’s tubercle (GT) and 12.3 (± 3.55) mm from the fibula head (FH). This was 59.5 (± 5.44) % from GT to FH.

Conclusions

This anatomical data adds to previous information about the ALL. Our results support the finding that the ALL is a capsular thickening with meniscal attachment. The findings will help to guide the further work required to define the indications for reconstruction and appropriate grafts.

Correlation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Knee Anterolateral Ligament Anatomy: A Cadaveric Study

BACKGROUND

Anatomic and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies have recently characterized the knee anterolateral ligament (ALL). So far, no study has focused on confirming whether the evaluated MRI parameters truly correspond with ALL anatomy.

PURPOSE

To assess the validity of MRI in detecting the ALL using an anatomic evaluation as reference.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive laboratory study.

METHODS

A total of 13 cadaveric knees were subjected to MRI and then to anatomic dissection. Dissection was performed according to previous anatomic study methodology. MRIs were performed with a 0.6- to 1.5-mm slice thickness and prior saline injection. The following variables were analyzed: distance from the origin of the ALL to the origin of the lateral collateral ligament (LCL), distance from the origin of the ALL to its bifurcation point, maximum length of the ALL, distance from the tibial insertion of the ALL to the articular surface of the tibia, ALL thickness, and ALL width. The 2 sets of measurements were analyzed using the Spearman correlation coefficient (ρ) and Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS

The ALL was clearly observed in all dissected knees and MRI scans. It originated anterior and distal to the LCL, close to the lateral epycondile center, and showed an anteroinferior path toward the tibia, inserting between the Gerdy tubercle and the fibular head, around 5 mm under the lateral plateau. The ρ values tended to increase together for all studied variables between the 2 methods, and all were statistically significant, except for thickness (P = .077). Bland-Altman plots showed a tendency toward a reduction of ALL thickness and width by MRI compared with anatomic dissection.

CONCLUSION

MRI scanning as described can accurately assess the ALL and demonstrates characteristics similar to those seen under anatomic dissection.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

MRI can accurately characterize the ALL in the anterolateral region of the knee, despite the presence of structures that might overlap and thus cause confusion when making assessments based on imaging methods.

Do outcomes of outpatient ACL reconstruction vary with graft type?

BACKGROUND

Studies establishing the feasibility of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction as an outpatient procedure in France were usually conducted with hamstring tendon grafts. The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of outpatient ACL reconstruction according to whether the graft was harvested from the hamstring tendons or patellar tendon.

HYPOTHESIS

Outpatient ACL reconstruction can be performed using any type of graft.

METHODS

A single-centre retrospective study was conducted in consecutive patients older than 16 years who had primary ACL reconstruction using patellar tendon or hamstring tendons, with or without lateral tenodesis. Patients who underwent other procedures on bones or peripheral ligaments and those with a previous history of ACL reconstruction were excluded. The primary evaluation criterion was the occurrence of complications within 45 days after surgery. Secondary evaluation criteria were the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain during the first 3 postoperative days, patient satisfaction on day 3, and the IKDC and Lysholm clinical scores on day 45.

RESULTS

The analysis included 104 knees (one knee per patient). Hamstring tendons were used in 77 (74%) knees and patellar tendon in 27 (26%) knees. In the hamstring group, 2 (2.6%) patients spent the first postoperative night in the hospital and 2 others were re-admitted. No hospitalisations were recorded in the patellar-tendon group. None of the patients required revision surgery within 45 days of the reconstruction procedure. None of the postoperative criteria studied showed statistically significant differences between the two groups.

DISCUSSION

ACL reconstruction can be performed on an outpatient basis using any type of graft. The main determinants of successful outpatient ACL reconstruction are a standardised clinical management strategy and an appropriate anaesthesia protocol.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective study.

Radiographic landmarks for surgical reconstruction of the anterolateral ligament of the knee

PURPOSE

To determine the radiographic landmarks of the anterolateral ligament (ALL) on the femur and tibia to assist in intraoperative graft placement during ALL reconstruction.

METHODS

The footprints of the ALL, fibular collateral ligament (FCL), popliteus insertion, lateral gastrocnemius insertion, and Gerdy's tubercle were isolated and centrally marked with tantalum beads in thirteen fresh-frozen cadaveric knees. Measurements were taken from the true lateral fluoroscopic images. On the femur, the mean distances from the ALL origin to the FCL origin and from the ALL origin to the popliteus insertion were measured. On the tibia, the mean distances from the ALL insertion to Gerdy's tubercle and from the ALL insertion to the lateral tibial plateau were measured. Furthermore, radiographic descriptions of the ALL origin and insertion were developed.

RESULTS

The ALL origin on the femur averaged 3.3 ± 1.5 mm anterior-distal to the FCL origin in one anatomical variant and 5.4 ± 1.4 mm posterior-proximal to the FCL origin in a second variant. The ALL origin was 9.9 ± 2.7 mm from the popliteus insertion. The ALL origin is described as overlying the posterior femoral cortical line, between Blumensaat's line and a line from the posterior condylar articular edge parallel to Blumensaat's line. The ALL insertion on the tibia averaged 24.7 ± 4.5 mm posterior to Gerdy's tubercle and 11.5 ± 2.9 mm distal to the lateral tibial plateau. The tibial ALL insertion is described between the posterior tibial cortical line and a parallel line drawn down from the apex of the tibial spine, and overlying a line drawn perpendicular to the posterior tibial cortical line starting from the apex of the posterior tibial condyles.

CONCLUSIONS

Using direct lateral fluoroscopy, radiographic landmarks of the ALL origin and insertion have been described.

Tibial slope correction combined with second revision ACL produces good knee stability and prevents graft rupture

PURPOSE

Revision ACL reconstruction requires careful analysis of failure causes particularly in cases of two previous graft ruptures. Intrinsic factors as excessive tibial slope or narrow femoral notch increase failure risks but are rarely addressed in revision surgery. The authors report outcomes, at minimum follow-up of 2 years, for second revision ACL reconstructions combined with tibial deflexion osteotomy for correction of excessive slope (>12°).

METHODS

Nine patients that underwent second revision ACL reconstruction combined with tibial deflexion osteotomy were retrospectively studied. The mean age was 30.3 ± 4.4 years (median 28; range 26-37), and mean follow-up was 4.0 ± 2.0 years (median 3.6; range 2.0-7.6). Autografts were harvested from the quadriceps tendon (n = 8) or hamstrings (n = 1), and tibial osteotomy was done by anterior closing wedge, without detachment of the patellar tendon, to obtain a slope of 3° to 5°.

RESULTS

All patients had fused osteotomies, stable knees, and there were no intraoperative or postoperative complications. The mean posterior tibial slope decreased from 13.2° ± 2.6° (median 13°; range 12°-18°) preoperatively to 4.4° ± 2.3° (median 4°; range 2°-8°) postoperatively. The mean Lysholm score was 73.8 ± 5.8 (median 74; range 65-82), and the IKDC-SKF was 71.6 ± 6.1 (median 72.8; range 62.2-78.5).

CONCLUSION

The satisfactory results of second revision ACL reconstruction combined with tibial deflexion osteotomy at minimum follow-up of 2 years suggest that tibia slope correction protects reconstructed ACL from fatigue failure in this study. The authors stress the importance of careful analysis failure causes prior to revision ACL reconstruction, and recommend correction of tibial slope if it exceeds 12°, to reduce the risks of graft retear.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Reduces Rotational Laxity When Combined With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of the Literature

PURPOSE

To determine whether the addition of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction would provide greater control of rotational laxity and improved clinical outcomes compared with ACL reconstruction alone.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers searched 9 databases for randomized and nonrandomized clinical studies comparing ACL reconstruction plus LET versus ACL reconstruction alone in a human adult population. All years and 5 languages were included. Animal and cadaveric studies, revision or repair surgical techniques, and studies focused on biomechanical outcomes were excluded. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed with the Cochrane Collaboration tool. Outcomes of interest included the pivot-shift test, KT-1000/-2000 measurements (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA), and International Knee Documentation Committee scores.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 3,612 articles. After titles and abstracts were reviewed, 106 articles were selected for full-text review, of which 29 studies met the inclusion criteria (8 randomized and 21 nonrandomized studies). Of the 8 randomized studies, 3 concluded that the results were nonsignificant between treatment groups, 4 were in favor of the extra-articular tenodesis, and 1 was in favor of the ACL reconstruction alone. The Cochrane Collaboration tool showed an unclear to high risk of bias for most articles. A meta-analysis showed a statistically significant difference for the pivot-shift test (P = .002, I2 = 34%) in favor of ACL reconstruction with LET. No difference was found between the groups for International Knee Documentation Committee scores (P = .75, I2 = 19%) and KT-1000/-2000 measurements (P = .84, I2 = 34%).

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant reduction in pivot shift in favor of the combined procedure. Studies lacked sufficient internal validity, sample size, methodologic consistency, and standardization of protocols and outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review of Level I, II, and III studies.

Anterolateral Ligament of the Knee: Back to the Future in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Although the importance of the anterolateral stabilizing structures of the knee in the setting of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries has been recognized since many years, most of orthopedic surgeons do not take into consideration the anterolateral structures when performing an ACL reconstruction. Anatomic single or double bundle ACL reconstruction will improve knee stability, but a small subset of patients may experience some residual anteroposterior and rotational instability. For this reason, some researchers have turned again towards the anterolateral aspect of the knee and specifically the anterolateral ligament. The goal of this review is to summarize the existing knowledge regarding the anterolateral ligament of the knee, including anatomy, histology, biomechanics and imaging. In addition, the most common anterolateral reconstruction/tenodesis techniques are described together with their respective clinical outcomes.

Combined Intra- and Extra-articular Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament: The Reconstruction of the Knee Anterolateral Ligament

We present a new technique for the combined intra- and extra-articular reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Intra-articular reconstruction is performed in an outside-in manner according to the precepts of the anatomic femoral tunnel technique. Extra-articular reconstruction is performed with the gracilis tendon while respecting the anatomic parameters of the origin and insertion points and the path described for the knee anterolateral ligament.

Return to sport after ACL reconstruction: how, when and why? A narrative review of current evidence

Allowing a patient to return to sport and unrestricted physical activity after ACL injury and reconstruction is one of the most challenging and difficult decisions an orthopaedic surgeon has to make. Indeed, many factors have to be taken into account before it can be considered safe for a patients to load a reconstructed knee. The current literature contains plenty of studies aimed at evaluating return to sport, and the factors that may affect or predict this outcome, e.g. intrinsic factors like genetics, biology, type of lesion, anatomical features, motivation and psychology, and extrinsic factors such as graft type, surgical technique, rehabilitation protocols, and biological support. It is possible that awareness of these issues could help the clinician to optimise outcomes, and possibly avoid failures too, although as yet no universal criteria for resuming sport have been produced.

Biomechanical evaluation of augmented and nonaugmented primary repair of the anterior cruciate ligament: an in vivo animal study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate in a sheep model the biomechanical performance of augmented and nonaugmented primary repair of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) following transection at the femoral end during a 12-month postoperative observation.

METHODS

Forty sheep were randomly assigned to nonaugmented or augmented primary ACL repair using a polyethylene terephthalate (PET) band. At two, six, 16, 26 and 52 weeks postoperatively four sheep in each group were sacrificed and biomechanical testing performed.

RESULTS

Compared with nonaugmented primary ACL repair, the PET-augmented repair demonstrated superior biomechanical results from 16 weeks postoperatively onwards in terms of anterioposterior (AP) laxity, tensile strength and ligament stiffness. The augmentation device works as a stress shield during the ligament healing process. The nonaugmented ACL repair also resulted in ligament healing, but the biomechanical properties were at a significantly lower level.

CONCLUSION

These results support the previously reported histological findings following augmented primary ACL repair. This animal study on the healing capacity of the ACL may provide some important contributions to how primary healing in certain types of ruptures can be achieved.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

I.

Lateral tenodesis combined with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a unique semitendinosus and gracilis transplant

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the anatomical results, functional results and the incidence of arthritis of a mixed intra- and extra-articular hamstring tendon based reconstruction for anterior instability of the knee.

METHODS

This retrospective study consists of 100 knees in 99 patients (22 female and 77 male) operated upon between November 2003 and March 2006. The average age was 29.7 ± 10.4 years and the average interval between injury and surgery was 26.6 ± 41.8 months (2-240). In our technique, the semitendinosus and gracilis tendons were left attached to the tibia and by means of a lateral transcondylar tunnel posterior and inferior to the proximal attachment of the lateral collateral ligament were passed around the knee before being sutured to the fascia lata at the level of Gerdy's tubercle.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight knees were re-examined at an average follow-up of 76 ± 12 months. The average differential anterior drawer test at the last review was 2.5 ± 3.4 mm (p < 0.0001). Of the patients 75 % had a negative pivot shift test, 21 % a gliding test and 4 % a clear positive test (p < 0.0001); 84 % of patients had an International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score rated A or B. The average IKDC subjective score was 90 ± 9 (60-100).

CONCLUSIONS

Mixed intra- and extra-articular reconstructions using hamstring grafts allow the knee to be stabilised in the sagittal plane and the rotatory instability to be controlled in the majority of cases. Only very minor progression of arthritic changes at an average 76 ± 12 months was seen.