Contralateral Patellar Tendon and The Shelbourne Experience: Part 1. Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Rehabilitation

Clinical Outcomes After Ipsilateral Versus Contralateral Autograft Harvest for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

Background

Contralateral donor autografts in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) may act as an alternative to conventional ipsilateral donor grafts but are rarely used clinically because of the lack of evidence on patient outcomes and concerns around additional morbidity.

Purpose

To investigate the effect of contralateral versus ipsilateral autograft use in ACLR on patient outcomes.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from inception to October 2022 for comparative studies assessing the clinical or functional outcomes of ipsilateral versus contralateral autograft harvest in primary or revision ACLR. Given the heterogeneity of the included studies, data were summarized using descriptive statistics.

Results

Included were 11 studies representing 1638 patients with a mean follow-up of 49 months. The mean time to return to sport was shorter in patients treated with a contralateral bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft in 2 of 3 studies that evaluated this outcome after primary ACLR and in the only study that evaluated this outcome after revision ACLR. Some studies found improved strength recovery in the contralateral ACL-reconstructed knee. Otherwise, there was no significant difference between contralateral and ipsilateral ACLRs on subjective or objective postoperative clinical outcome scores. Most studies reported minimal donor site morbidity. Clinical adverse events including postoperative graft rerupture and infection were low in both contralateral and ipsilateral ACLRs and were not significantly different.

Conclusion

Contralateral ACL autograft harvest may lead to earlier return to sport when patients undergo BPTB ACLR. However, clinical outcomes, morbidity, risk of rerupture, and risk of donor knee injury were not significantly different in this review.

Return to Sports and Subsequent Injury Rates After Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Patellar Tendon Autograft

BACKGROUND

The return-to-sport and reinjury rates are not well defined after revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

HYPOTHESIS

School-age athletes would have a higher rate of return to sports and reinjury to either knee after revision ACL surgery compared with college or recreational athletes.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

Patients were prospectively studied after revision ACL reconstruction with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft. Participants were grouped by competitive sport levels of school age (mean age, 16.6 ± 0.9 years; n = 84), college (19.6 ± 1.2 years; n = 58), or recreational adult (27.6 ± 4.1 years; n = 117). An activity survey was used to determine the specific sport and sport level patients participated in before and after surgery. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) knee survey and Cincinnati Knee Rating System (CKRS) survey responses were also obtained.

RESULTS

The rate of return to the same sport at the same level was 62 of 84 school-age athletes (74%), 43 of 58 college athletes (74%), and 73 of 117 recreational athletes (62%) (P = .1065). The number of patients who had a subsequent ACL graft tear rate after revision surgery was 2 of 84 (2.3%) in the high school group, 3 of 58 (5.1%) in the college group, and 4 of 117 (3.4%) in the recreational group (P = .6706). The number of patients who had a subsequent ACL tear in the contralateral knee was 1 of 84 (1.1%) in the school-age group, 1 of 58 (1.7%) in the college group, and 2 of 117 (1.7%) in the recreational group (P = .9501). At 2 years postoperatively, the mean IKDC subjective total score was 86.1 ± 11.7 points and the mean CKRS total score was 89.7 ± 11.1 points.

CONCLUSION

Revision ACL reconstruction with BPTB autograft and perioperative rehabilitation allowed high school and college athletes to return to sports at the preinjury level at a rate of 74%; the return rate for recreational-level adults was 62%. Reinjury rates in the first 5 years after revision surgery ranged from 2% to 5%, which is lower than what has been reported for young competitive athletes after primary surgery.

Descriptive epidemiology of the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) cohort

BACKGROUND

Revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has worse outcomes than primary reconstructions. Predictors for these worse outcomes are not known. The Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) Group was developed to perform a multisurgeon, multicenter prospective longitudinal study to obtain sufficient subjects to allow multivariable analysis to determine predictors of clinical outcome.

PURPOSE

To describe the formation of MARS and provide descriptive analysis of patient demographics and clinical features for the initial 460 enrolled patients to date in this prospective cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

After training and institutional review board approval, surgeons began enrolling patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction, recording patient demographics, previous ACL reconstruction methods, intra-articular injuries, and current revision techniques. Enrolled subjects completed a questionnaire consisting of validated patient-based outcome measures.

RESULTS

As of April 1, 2009, 87 surgeons have enrolled a total of 460 patients (57% men; median age, 26 years). For 89%, the reconstruction was the first revision. Mode of failure as deemed by the revising surgeon was traumatic (32%), technical (24%), biologic (7%), combination (37%), infection (<1%), and no response (<1%). Previous graft present at the time of injury was 70% autograft, 27% allograft, 2% combination, and 1% unknown. Sixty-two percent were more than 2 years removed from their last reconstruction. Graft choice for revision ACL reconstruction was 45% autograft, 54% allograft, and more than 1% both allograft and autograft. Meniscus and/or chondral damage was found in 90% of patients.

CONCLUSION

The MARS Group has been able to quickly accumulate the largest revision ACL reconstruction cohort reported to date. Traumatic reinjury is deemed by surgeons to be the most common single mode of failure, but a combination of factors represents the most common mode of failure. Allograft graft choice is more common in the revision setting than autograft. Concomitant knee injury is extremely common in this population.

What I have learned about the ACL: utilizing a progressive rehabilitation scheme to achieve total knee symmetry after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Anterior cruciate ligament surgery and rehabilitation have changed drastically during the past 30 years. The patellar tendon autograft fixed with buttons provides tight bone-to-bone placement of the graft and quick bony healing, which allows accelerated rehabilitation to obtain full range of motion and strength. Although surgical stability is easily reproducible, long-term patient satisfaction is difficult to guarantee. Full knee range of motion should be compared to that of the contralateral normal knee, including full hyperextension. We followed the progress of all patients to gauge the utility of our rehabilitation program. In order of importance, the lack of normal knee range of motion (within 2 degrees extension and 5 degrees of flexion compared with that of the normal knee), partial or total medial meniscectomy, partial or total lateral meniscectomy, and articular cartilage damage were related to lower subjective scores. Rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction must first strive to achieve full symmetrical knee range of motion before aggressive strengthening can begin. Our current perioperative rehabilitation starts at the time of injury and preoperatively includes aggressive swelling reduction, hyperextension exercises, gait training, and mental preparation. Goals after surgery are to control swelling while regaining full knee range of motion. After quadriceps strengthening goals are reached, patients can shift to sport-specific exercises. When using a graft from the contralateral knee, the conflicting goals of strengthening the donor site and achieving full knee range of motion are divided between the knees. Thus, normal range of motion and strength can be achieved more easily and more quickly than when using an ipsilateral graft. Regardless of the graft source, a systematic rehabilitation program that emphasizes the return to symmetrical knee motion, including hyperextension, is necessary to achieve the optimum result.