Combined intra- and extra-articular grafting for revision ACL reconstruction: A multicentre study by the French Arthroscopy Society (SFA)

Combined anterior cruciate ligament revision with reconstruction of the antero-lateral ligament does not improve outcome at 2-year follow-up compared to isolated acl revision; a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

It is essential to obtain rotational stability of the knee after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) and it is suggested that a supplementary reconstruction of the antero-lateral ligament (ALL-R) may supports this. Theoretically, ALL-R may be particularly advantageous to support revision of failed ACL-Rs. It was hypothesized that ACL revision combined with ALL-R will result in superior outcome compared to isolated ACL revision.

METHODS

The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial. Patients eligible for first time ACL revision were randomized to either isolated ACL revision (- ALL group) or ACL revision combined with a single-stranded allograft ALL-reconstruction (+ ALL group). Patient reported outcomes and function were evaluated at two-year follow-up by KNEES-ACL, KOOS, and Tegner activity scale. Objective knee laxity was evaluated at one-year follow-up using an instrumented Rolimeter test, the pivot shift test, and a manual Lachman test.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients were enrolled with 49 patients randomized to the + ALL group and 54 patients in the - ALL group. There were no differences at baseline between groups regarding age, gender, body mass index, preoperative patient reported outcome scores and concomitant meniscus or cartilage injury. The ACL revision was performed with an allograft in 10 patients (20%) in the + ALL group and 8 patients (15%) in the -ALL group. At follow-up there was no significant difference between the groups in patient reported outcome scores and clinical knee laxity.

CONCLUSION

Supplementary ALL-R does not improve subjective outcome of first time ACL revision at two-years and clinical knee stability at one-year follow-up compared to isolated ACL revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Good rates of return-to-sport in athletes after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autologous patellar tendon and lateral extra-articular tenodesis: a 2-year follow-up prospective study

BACKGROUND

Most athletes who undergo revision of the anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) aim to return to their preinjury sport at a similar level of performance while minimizing the risk for reinjury. Additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) has recently been correlated with improved outcomes and low complication rate. Yet, there are few series evaluating return-to-sport (RTS) and clinical outcomes after revision ACLR using bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and LET in athletes.

METHODS

The study cohort consisted of 19 eligible athletes who had undergone their first revision ACLR using BPTB and LET (modified Lemaire) between January 2019 and 2020. Patients were prospectively followed and interviewed in a sports activity survey during a 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Despite all patients returning to sports after revision ACLR surgery, 52.6% resumed playing at their preinjury level. Furthermore, patient-reported functional outcomes improved significantly following revision surgery, as evidenced by improvements in IKDC [64.4 (± 12) to 87.8 (± 6)], Lysholm [71.27 (± 12) to 84.2 (± 9.7)], and SF-12 scales [Physical: 53.3 (± 3) 57 (± 1.2); Mental: 50.2 (± 3.3) to 52.7 (± 2.4)]. One case (5.3%) experienced persistent pain and underwent reoperation for a partial meniscectomy.

CONCLUSION

After revision ACLR using autologous BPTB and LET, all active individuals are expected to RTS, similar to primary ACLR. The difference comes down to returning to the preinjury level, where the levels are lower depending on the sport and initial level of play. Good mid-term functional outcomes with a low complication rate can be expected in most cases.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence IV.

ETHICAL COMMITTEE APPROVAL NUMBER

PR(ATR)79/2021 and HCB/2023/0173.

Additional Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Helps Patients Improve Dynamic Postural Stability in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Background and Objectives: The goal in treating anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury especially in revision cases is return to sports activity by regaining dynamic postural stability. Among various methods to achieve this goal, additional anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) is gaining attention. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of additional ALLR in revision ACL reconstruction (RACLR). Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent RACLR between July 2015 and June 2018 were enrolled. The exclusion criteria were less than 1-year follow-up, age older than 45 years, concomitant multiple ligament injuries, contralateral knee injury, subtotal or total meniscectomized state, and articular cartilage lesions worse than Outerbridge grade 3. Thirty-nine patients (20 patients; RACLR only (Group A), 19 patients; RACLR with additional ALLR (Group B)) were included. Clinical scores (Lysholm score, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Tegner activity scale), isokinetic strength test, single-leg-hop for distance test (SLHDT), Y-balance test (YBT) were checked preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. Results: Limb symmetry index values in YBT showed significantly better result in Group B 1-year postoperatively (Group A: 97.2 ± 4.0, Group B: 100.3 ± 2.9, p = 0.010), although there were no differences preoperatively between groups (Group A: 90.4 ± 6.7, Group B: 89.3 ± 5.5, p = 0.594). Regarding clinical scores, isokinetic strength tests, and SLHDT, there were no differences between groups preoperatively nor 1-year postoperatively. Conclusions: Additional ALLR in RACLR helped patients gain better dynamic postural stability at 1-year postoperative follow-up.

The Addition of Either an Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction or an Iliotibial Band Tenodesis Is Associated With a Lower Failure Rate After Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Retrospective Comparative Trial

PURPOSE

To compare the failure rate in patients who underwent revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction alone or associated with an extra-articular procedure. Secondary objectives were to compare ACL laxity, patient-reported outcome measures, and complication rates in these patients and, subsequently, to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction associated with anatomical anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction or lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET).

METHODS

This was a retrospective comparative study. Patients were classified into 2 groups, according to whether (group 2) or not (group 1) an extra-articular reconstruction was performed. Patients who underwent an extra-articular procedure were further divided into ALL reconstruction (group 2A) and LET (group 2B). Baseline demographic variables, operative data and postoperative data were evaluated.

RESULTS

The groups with (86 patients) and without (88 patients) an associated extra-articular reconstruction had similar preoperative data. Group 2 had a lower failure rate (4.6% vs 14.7%; P = .038), better KT-1000, better pivot-shift, and better Lysholm. There was no difference regarding complications, except more lateral pain in group 2. Regarding the groups who underwent ALL reconstruction (41 patients) and LET (46 patients), group 2A showed better Lysholm scores. Both groups had similar failure rates and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction with a laterally based augmentation procedure had a lower failure rate than patients who underwent isolated revision ACL reconstruction. KT-1000 and pivot-shift examination were also significantly better when a lateral augmentation was performed. Complications were similar except for an increase in lateral pain in the augmented group. No clinically important differences were found when comparing the LET group to the ALL group other than a statistical improvement in the Lysholm functional scale, likely not clinically meaningful, favoring the ALL group and an increased duration of post-operative lateral pain in the LET group.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Allografts and lateral extra-articular tenodesis for revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: enhanced rotational stability and improved functional outcomes

PURPOSE

Multiple studies have shown higher failure rate and patient-reported outcomes to be significantly worse following revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstructive (ACLR) surgery, especially using allografts. One of the reasons being rotational instability. Because of this, augmentation with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) is often considered. Good short-term results in regards to functional and perceived scores and low complication rate can be expected in revision ACLR using allografts in combination with LET.

METHODS

Between 2014 and 2021, 46 patients were registered for revision ACLR using allografts and extra-articular augmentation (modified Lemaire) and included in this prospective study. Patients' demographic and clinical data were collected preoperatively, postoperatively, and during the follow-up period of 12 months.

RESULTS

Patient-reported functional outcomes were statistically significant for IKDC, Lysholm, and SF-12 physical scale (p < 0.05). Tegner score showed a decreased number of patients who were able to return to sport at their previous level (p = 0.001). Stability examination tests (Lachman and pivot-shift) showed significant improvements. Concomitant lesions were present in 76.1% of patients. Ten patients (21.7%) presented major complications, including six cases of anteroposterior instability, three cases of knee pain and one graft re-rupture.

CONCLUSION

Revision procedures are inherently challenging with a high number of associated chondral and meniscus lesions. However, good short-term functional outcomes and enhanced rotational stability with an acceptable complication rate can be expected in most cases where revision ACLR using allografts is augmented with LET.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective; Case series; Level of evidence IV.

Imaging Findings of Complications After Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis of the Knee: A Current Concepts Review

Background:

Despite successful anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, many patients continue to experience persistent anterolateral rotatory instability. Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) is used to address this instability by harvesting a portion of the iliotibial band, passing it underneath the fibular collateral ligament, and attaching it just proximal and posterior to the lateral femoral epicondyle. Based on the most recent clinical evidence, the addition of LET to ACL reconstruction improves clinical outcomes, which has led to an increase in the use of this technique.

Purpose:

To provide an overview of the postoperative complications of the LET procedure and their associated imaging findings, with a focus on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

Study Design:

Narrative review.

Methods:

In this scoping review, the authors reviewed available radiographic, computed tomography, and MRI scans of patients who experienced postoperative complications after ACL reconstruction with LET, in which the complication was determined to be from the LET procedure. Images were reviewed and subsequently described by an on-staff musculoskeletal radiologist.

Results:

The authors found 9 different complications associated with LET: graft failure, hematoma, infection, chronic pain, tunnel convergence, fixation device migration, muscular hernia, peroneal nerve palsy, and knee stiffness. They supplemented these findings with radiographic evidence from 6 patients.

Conclusion:

As extra-articular reconstruction techniques including LET become more popular among orthopaedic surgeons, it is important that radiologists and surgeons be adept at recognizing the normal imaging findings of LET and associated complications.

Double-Layered Quadriceps Tendon Autografts Provide Lower Failure Rates and Improved Clinical Results Compared With Hamstring Tendon Grafts in Revision ACL Reconstruction

Background:

We developed a quadriceps-tendon graft technique using a double-layered, partial-thickness, soft tissue quadriceps tendon graft (dlQUAD) for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). This technique allows simple femoral loop button fixation and a limited harvest depth of the quadriceps tendon.

Purpose:

To evaluate the outcome of patients undergoing revision ACLR using the dlQUAD technique compared with a hamstring tendon graft (HT).

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

A total of 114 patients who underwent revision ACLR between 2017 and 2018 were included in this retrospective case series. At a mean follow-up of 26.9 ± 3.7 months (range, 24-36), 89 patients (dlQUAD: n = 43, HT: n = 46) were clinically examined. In addition, patients completed the Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Postoperative failure of the revision ACLR was defined as a side-to-side difference (SSD) in Rolimeter testing ≥5 mm or a pivot-shift grade of 2 or 3.

Results:

Nine patients (10.1%) were identified with a failed revision ACLR. There was a significantly lower failure rate with dlQUAD versus the HT group (2.3% vs 17.4%; P = .031). The mean postoperative SSD was significantly less in the dlQUAD group (1.3 ± 1.3 mm [range, 0-5] vs 1.8 ± 2.2 mm [range, 0-9]; P = .043). At the latest follow-up, Tegner and IKDC scores significantly improved in the dlQUAD group compared with the HT group (Tegner: 5.8 ± 1.8 vs 5.6 ± 1.5; P = .043; IKDC: 83.8 ± 12.2 vs 78.6 ± 16.8; P = .037). The pain VAS score was also significantly reduced in the dlQUAD group compared with the HT group (0.9 ± 1.1 vs 1.6 ± 2.0; P = .014).

Conclusion:

The dlQUAD and HT techniques both demonstrated significant improvement of preoperative knee laxity and satisfactory patient-reported outcome measures after revision ACLR. Compared with the HT grafts, the dlQUAD technique showed lower failure rates and small increases in Tegner and IKDC scores.

The association of extra-articular tenodesis restores rotational stability more effectively compared to contralateral hamstring tendon autografts ACL reconstruction alone in patients undergoing ACL revision surgery

BACKGROUND

Recent years have seen a resurgence of interest about lateral extra-articular procedures performed in association with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery, as they can reduce the positivity to pivot shift test by acting on rotational instability. The purpose of the present study is to compare the postoperative functional outcomes of ACL revision surgery using contralateral hamstring tendon autografts with or without extra-articular tenodesis.

HYPOTHESIS

The hypothesis is that combined extra-articular tenodesis gives better rotational stability following revision ACL surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-four patients who underwent ACL revision surgery were retrospectively reviewed at an average follow-up of 4.5 years; 12 underwent contralateral hamstring tendon autografts reconstruction (group A) while in 12 extra-articular tenodesis was associated (group B). Assessment included Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form, Tegner activity level and objective evaluation (range of motion, Lachman test, pivot-shift test and KT-1000 instrumented laxity testing).

RESULTS

Follow-up examination showed that there were no statistically significant differences in Lysholm, IKDC and Tegner scores between the groups (p=n.s.). Similarly, no differences concerning anterior tibial translation as measured with KT-1000 arthrometer were reported between the groups (p=n.s.); the percentage of positivity to pivot shift test was significantly higher in patients in group A (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The association of extra-articular tenodesis restores rotational stability more effectively compared to contralateral hamstring tendon autografts ACL revision surgery alone.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Single-Stage Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experience With 91 Patients (40 Elite Athletes) Using an Algorithm

BACKGROUND

The increased prevalence of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has led to an increased need for revision ACL reconstructions. Despite the growing body of literature indicating that single-stage revision ACL reconstruction can yield good outcomes, there is a lack of data for determining when and how to safely perform a single-stage revision.

PURPOSE

To assess the outcomes, graft failure rates, and return-to-play rates of a decision-making algorithm for single-stage revision ACL reconstruction.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

We reviewed a consecutive series of revision ACL reconstructions performed by the senior author between September 2009 and July 2016 with minimum 2-year follow-up. All patients were assessed, and decision making was undertaken according to the algorithm. Outcomes measured were further surgery, graft rerupture, re-revision, Tegner score, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). For the elite athlete population, return-to-play time, duration, and level of play after surgery as compared with preinjury were also determined.

RESULTS

During this period, 93 procedures were performed in 92 patients (40 elite athletes). Two 2-stage procedures were undertaken, leaving 91 single-stage procedures (91 patients) to form the basis for further study. At a mean 4.3 years (SD, 2.2 years) after surgery, there had been 2 re-revisions (2.2%) and 2 further instances of graft failure that had not been re-revised (total graft failure rate, 4.4%). There were 17 subsequent procedures, including 6 arthroscopic partial meniscectomies, 5 removals of prominent implants, and 1 total knee arthroplasty. The mean Tegner score was 8.02 before graft rerupture and 7.1 at follow-up. At follow-up, the mean KOOS outcomes were 79.3 for Symptoms, 88.0 for Pain, 94.2 for Activities of Daily Living, 73.6 for Sport, and 68.9 for Quality of Life. Of 40 elite athletes, 35 returned to play at a mean 11.2 months (SD, 3.6 months) after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Single-stage revision ACL reconstructions can be performed reliably in the majority of patients, with good clinical outcomes, low rerupture rates, and high-return-to play rates, even in the elite athlete population.

Anterior Cruciate and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Using Hamstring and Peroneus Longus Tendons: Surgical Technique Description

The main objective of this study is to describe a surgical technique that combines intra- and extra-articular techniques using the semitendinosus, gracilis, and peroneus longus to perform reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament and anterolateral ligament. This technique offers a more stable, fast, low-cost, and widely accessible procedure and consists of drilling 3 tunnels-1 femoral and 2 tibial tunnels-in which the grafts are fixed with interference screws. The fact that the peroneus longus graft is long and thick allows for robust reconstruction of the aforementioned ligaments.

Revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a pedicled quadruple hamstring autograft

INTRODUCTION

Results of iterative ACL reconstructions are lower than after primary reconstructions. Our aim was to report the results of a retrospective series of revision using pedicled quadruple hamstring autograft. The hypothesis was that the results were satisfactory and comparable to the literature.

METHODS

The study period was from January 2012 to December 2014. Fourteen patients (average age 26) were included. A fascia lata graft was used 12 times for primary reconstruction. Trauma was the cause of failure 12 times. The time interval between primary reconstruction and revision was 6.2 years. Preoperative scores used were LYSHOLM, TEGNER and IKDC. Sagittal stability was measured using the KT-1000 device. X-rays and MRI were performed to confirm the diagnosis, look for preoperative osteoarthritis and evaluate the position of the bony tunnels (Bernard and Hertel). Bone tunnels were in a proper position 14 times.

RESULTS

At 45-month follow-up, improvement of objective IKDC score was significant (85.7% A/B, p < 0.0002) as well as subjective IKDC score (85.5, p < 0.0004). A significant improvement was established for the LYSHOLM score (91.8, p = 0.001) using the Wilcoxon test. The average LYSHOLM score was 92% (p > 0.5), and the average TEGNER score was 5.5 (p = 0.003). The Lachman test found a hard stop in all patients. The pivot shift test was negative for 78.5% of the cases. The laxity measurement found 12 cases with less than 3 mm. One persistent distal hypoesthesia at 2-year follow-up was observed.

CONCLUSION

The hypothesis was confirmed. This series differs by the cause of failure, which was essentially traumatic, and the initial predominance of a fascia lata graft. These results remain to be confirmed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective case series, level IV.

Good mid-term outcomes and low rates of residual rotatory laxity, complications and failures after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL) and lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET)

BACKGROUND

Residual rotational instability remains a controversial factor when analysing failure rates of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Anatomical and biomechanical studies have demonstrated a very important role of anterolateral structures for rotational control. Revision ACL is considered one of the main indications for a lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET). Yet, few series evaluating these procedures are published.

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review of studies that assessed outcomes in patients treated with revision ACL surgery associated with a lateral extra-articular procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed in February 2018 using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Search and Cochrane. Inclusion criteria were series of ACL revision reconstructions associated with lateral extra-articular procedures. Clinical outcomes (Lysholm, subjective IKDC, KOOS, Cincinnati and WOMAC), joint stability measures (Lachman test, pivot-shift, arthrometer assessment and navigation assessment), graft type, reported chondral and meniscal injury, radiographic outcomes, complications and failures were recorded. Articles were assessed for level of evidence and methodology using a modification of the ACL Methodology Score (AMS) system.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria out of the 231 abstracts; 9 retrospective evaluations, two prospective cohorts and one combination of two populations (a retrospective and prospective series). A total of 851 patients evaluated with a mean age of 28.8 years (range 16-68 years) and a weighted mean follow-up of 4.9 years (range 1-10 years). The mean time from primary ACL reconstruction to revision was 5.3 years (reported in 7 studies, including 710 patients). The Lysholm, IKDC, and KOOS scores indicated favorable results in studies that reported these outcomes. Objective evaluations reported 86% objective A and B IKDC results, 2.6 mm mean side-to-side arthrometric difference and 80% negative pivot-shift. About 74% of patients returned to their previous sport (evaluated in six studies). Few studies reported radiological evaluation. Fifty-nine complications (8.0%) and 24 failures (3.6%) were reported. The mean modified ACL Methodology Score was 55.5 (range 32-72).

CONCLUSION

Good mid-term results were obtained for combined revision ACL reconstruction and lateral extra-articular procedures. Despite the fact that in clinical practice LET are a common indication associated with revision ACL, there are no high-level studies supporting this technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Preoperative medial knee instability is an underestimated risk factor for failure of revision ACL reconstruction

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to carefully analyse the reasons for revision ACLR failure to optimize the surgical revision technique and minimize the risk of recurrent re-rupture. Large studies with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up that clinically examine patients with revision ACLR are rare.

METHODS

Between 2013 and 2016, 111 patients who underwent revision ACLR were included in the retrospective study. All patients were examined for a minimum of 2 years after revision surgery (35 ± 3.4 months, mean ± STD) and identified as "failed revision ACLR" (side-to-side difference ≥ 5 mm and pivot-shift grade 2/3) or "stable revision ACLR".

RESULTS

Failure after revision ACLR occurred in 14.5% (n = 16) of the cases. Preoperative medial knee instability (n = 36) was associated with failure; thus, patients had a 17 times greater risk of failure when medial knee instability was diagnosed (p = 0.015). The risk of failure was reduced when patients had medial stabilization (n = 24, p = 0.034) and extra-articular lateral tenodesis during revision surgery (n = 51, p = 0.028). Increased posterior tibial slope (n = 11 ≥ 12°, p = 0.046) and high-grade anterior knee laxity (side-to-side difference > 6 mm and pivot-shift grade 3, n = 41, p = 0.034) were associated with increased failure of revision ACLR. Obese patients had a 9 times greater risk of failure (p = 0.008, n = 30).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the largest revision ACLR patient group with pre- and postoperative clinical examination data and a follow-up of 2 years published to date. Preoperative medial knee instability is an underestimated risk factor for revision ACLR failure. Additionally, high-grade anterior knee laxity, increased PTS and high BMI are risk factors for failure of revision ACLR, while additional medial stabilization and lateral extra-articular tenodesis reduce the risk of failure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Two-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

With the rising number of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions, revision ACL reconstructions are becoming increasingly common. A revision procedure may be performed to improved knee function, correct instability, and facilitate a return to normal activities. When performing a revision reconstruction, the surgeon decides between a single-stage or a two-stage revision. Two-stage revisions are rarely performed, but are particularly useful when addressing substantial tunnel-widening, active infection, and concomitant knee pathology (e.g., malalignment, other ligamentous injuries, meniscal or chondral lesions). Among these potential scenarios requiring a two-stage revision, tunnel-widening is the most common cause; the first stage involves graft removal, tunnel curettage, and bone grafting, followed by revision ACL reconstruction in the second stage. The purpose of this article is to review the preoperative planning, surgical considerations, rehabilitation, and outcomes of two-stage revision ACL reconstructions and summarize the recent literature outlining treatment results.

Lateral extra-articular reconstruction length changes during weightbearing knee flexion and pivot shift: A simulation study

INTRODUCTION

Variations in the length of lateral extra-articular reconstruction (LER) have been widely investigated during knee flexion but there is no information about length changes during pivot shift. This study sought to assess the changes in LER tension during weightbearing knee flexion in a normal knee and in a computer-simulated pivot-shift scenario.

HYPOTHESIS

Placing the femoral tunnel posterior and proximal to the lateral femoral epicondyle allows the LER to tighten early in the flexion range during weightbearing (squatting motion) and simulated pivot-shift.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A computer model was used to simulate weightbearing knee flexion and pivot shift scenarios. Changes in LER tension were calculated in both scenarios by estimating the distance between six femoral attachment sites (posterior and proximal to the lateral femoral epicondyle) and two tibial tunnel locations: Gerdy's tubercle (GT) and the anterolateral ligament (ALL) anatomic attachment site.

RESULTS

Independent of the location of the femoral and tibial tunnels, the LER tightened by up to 22% of its resting length during the early portion of weightbearing knee flexion and then relaxed from 40° to 60° of knee flexion. The ALL tibial tunnel position allowed complete LER relaxation at 60° flexion whereas LER using the GT tibial tunnel position remained tighter. In the simulated pivot-shift test, and for all femoral tunnel locations, the LER tightened by 20% to 34% of its resting value for the GT tibial tunnel position and by 11% to 26% for the ALL tibial tunnel position.

DISCUSSION

During weightbearing knee flexion, placing the femoral tunnel proximal and posterior to the femoral epicondyle was associated with LER tightening in the early degrees of flexion and LER relaxation between 40 and 60° flexion. LER tightening occurred during a simulated pivot-shift test supporting the concept that a posterior and proximal femoral LER tunnel position is most effective during weightbearing knee flexion and altered knee kinematics.

ACL Reconstruction with Augmentation: a Scoping Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We reviewed the recent literature to identify and summarize new research surrounding anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with augmentation in the form of additional soft tissue procedures or biologic augmentation. Specifically, we wanted to review the failure rates of these procedures in both the primary and revision settings.

METHODS

The databases Embase, PubMed, and Medline were searched on August 13, 2018, for English-language studies that reported on the use of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (primary and revision) in conjunction with either soft tissue or biologic augmentation. The studies were systematically screened and data abstracted in duplicates.

RECENT FINDINGS

Advancements in ACLR surgery, including soft tissue augmentation, may decrease primary and revision surgery failure rates for high-risk patients. The use of biological augmentation has shown histologic and radiographic improvements. These differences, however, have failed to be statistically significant and have not resulted in clinically significant improvements in outcome. The limited body of evidence has shown that the addition of soft tissue procedures may in fact lower the risk of graft re-rupture rates particularly in revision or in patients wishing to return to high-risk sports and activities. The use of biologic augmentation although promising in laboratory studies has yet to show any significant clinical results and therefore will require further studies to prove any efficacy.

Clinical Outcomes of Isolated Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction or in Combination With Anatomic Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Although the cause of rotational instability after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is multifactorial, the rationale of adding an extra-articular procedure is based on its ability to restrict rotational instability.

PURPOSE

To assess the effect of anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction on revision ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A total of 87 patients who underwent revision ACLR between March 2011 and July 2014 with a follow-up of more than 3 years were included in this retrospective study. Patients were divided into the isolated revision ACLR group (group I, n = 45, from March 2011 to January 2013) or the revision ACLR in combination with ALL reconstruction group (group C, n = 42, from February 2013 to July 2014). Subjective knee assessments including the subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form, Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, and Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI) scale were used. Clinical and functional tests were performed before surgery and at ≥6 months after surgery. All tests were usually completed at 36 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up duration for groups I and C were 41.5 ± 8.2 and 38.2 ± 6.9 months, respectively ( P = .451). The subjective IKDC score, Tegner score, and ACL-RSI score were significantly better in group C compared with those in group I at the last follow-up (84.3 ± 18.5 vs 75.9 ± 19.2, 7.0 ± 0.8 vs 6.3 ± 0.7, and 69.5 ± 25.4 vs 51.9 ± 23.1, respectively), although they were not significantly different between the 2 groups at 12 months after surgery (79.2 ± 18.8 vs 76.7 ± 17.2, 6.7 ± 0.7 vs 6.5 ± 0.9, and 50.2 ± 24.6 vs 49.9 ± 25.1, respectively). There were no significant differences in KT-2000 arthrometer, isokinetic extensor strength, single-legged hop for distance, co-contraction test, or carioca test results between the 2 groups at the last follow-up ( P = .304, .068, .125, .056, and .066, respectively). Preoperatively, 43 (95.6%) patients in group I and 40 (95.2%) patients in group C had a grade 2 or 3 pivot shift ( P = .387). Postoperatively, 23 (53.5%) patients in group I and 38 (90.5%) patients in group C had a negative pivot shift ( P < .001). Group C showed a higher rate of return to the same level of sports activity than group I (57.1% vs 25.6%, respectively; P = .008), although there was no significant difference in the rate of return to any sports activity at the last follow-up (88.4% in group I vs 88.1% in group C; P = .713).

CONCLUSION

Revision ACLR in combination with ALL reconstruction significantly reduced rotational laxity and showed a higher rate of return to the same level of sports activity than revision ACLR alone, although there were no significant differences in anterior laxity or functional test results between the 2 groups.

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.