Clinical Outcomes After Combined ACL and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Versus Isolated ACL Reconstruction With Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Grafts: A Matched-Pair Analysis of 2018 Patients From the SANTI Study Group

Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis and Anterolateral Procedures

The treatment of rotational instability has been an intriguing challenge since the era of modern anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery. Lateral extra-articular procedures (LEAPs) have emerged as a solution to this problem, particularly in high-risk populations. Several studies have shown significant benefits of combining LEAPs with ACL reconstruction, including reduced graft failure rates, improved knee stability, improved rotational stability, and higher return-to-play rates. These findings have led to an in-depth evaluation of LEAPs as lateral extra-articular tenodesis and anterolateral ligament reconstruction and their potential role in improving outcomes after ACL reconstruction.

Effect of Lateral Extra-Articular Procedures Combined With ACL Reconstruction on the Rate of Graft Rupture in Patients Aged Older Than 30 Years: A Matched-Pair Analysis of 1102 Patients From the SANTI Study Group

BACKGROUND

Clinical studies have demonstrated significant advantages of combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) and lateral extra-articular procedures (LEAPs) over isolated ACLR in terms of reducing graft rupture and reoperation rates. However, most of the published studies have included young patients, and no studies have focused on patients aged >30 years.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of isolated ACLR versus ACLR + LEAP at midterm follow-up in patients aged >30 years. The hypothesis was that patients who underwent combined procedures would experience significantly lower rates of graft rupture.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients >30 years of age who underwent primary ACLR + LEAP between January 2003 and December 2020 were propensity matched at a 1:1 ratio to patients who underwent isolated ACLR. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed to determine graft rupture rates, knee stability, reoperation rates, and complications. Graft survivorship was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Risk factors associated with the occurrence of graft failure were analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

Two groups of 551 patients each were included in the study, and the mean follow-up was 97.19 ± 47.23 months. The overall mean age was 37.01 ± 6.24 years. The LEAP group consisted of 503 (91.3%) patients who had anterolateral ligament reconstruction and 48 (8.7%) patients who had a Lemaire procedure. Overall, 19 (1.7%) patients had graft failure: 15 (2.7%) in the no-LEAP group and 4 (0.7%) in the LEAP group (P = .0116). The risk of graft failure was significantly associated with the absence of LEAP (31 vs 12; hazard ratio, 3.309; 95% CI, 1.088-10.065; P = .0350) and age between 30 and 35 years (hazard ratio, 4.533; 95% CI, 1.484-13.841; P = .0080). A higher rate of reoperation for secondary meniscectomy was found in the no-LEAP group (5.6% vs 2.2%; P = .0031).

CONCLUSION

Patients aged >30 years who underwent combined ACLR and LEAP experienced a >3-fold lower risk of ACL graft failure compared with those who underwent isolated ACLR. Furthermore, the group without LEAP experienced a higher rate of secondary meniscectomy.

Secondary Restraints in ACL Reconstruction: State of the Art

At-risk patients continue to experience a high likelihood of graft rupture after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR). This narrative review seeks to provide the reader with an evidence-based synopsis of state-of-the-art concepts related to secondary restraint lesions, and how addressing them surgically might result in improved outcomes of ACLR.

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.

Lateral extra-articular tenodesis may be more cost-effective than independent anterolateral ligament reconstruction: A systematic review and economic analysis

IMPORTANCE

Anterolateral augmentation during primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) may lower rates of ACL graft failure. However, differences in costs between two techniques, lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR), are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review and subsequent cost-effectiveness analysis comparing LET versus ALLR in the setting of primary ACLR. The hypothesis was that LET is more cost-effective than ALLR.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A systematic review was conducted on studies in which patients underwent primary ACLR with a concomitant LET or ALLR with minimum 24 months follow-up published between January 2013 and July 2023. Primary outcomes included ACL graft failure rates and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey-Quality of Life (KOOS-QoL) subscale scores, which were used to determine health utilities measured by quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. A decision tree model with one-way and two-way sensitivity analyses compared the cost of primary ACLR with a concomitant LET, independent autograft ALLR, or independent allograft ALLR. Costs were estimated using a combination of QALYs, institution prices, literature references, and a survey sent to 49 internationally recognized high-volume knee surgeons.

FINDINGS

A total of 2505 knees undergoing primary ACLR with concomitant LET (n=1162) or ALLR (n=1343) were identified from 22 studies. There were 77 total ACL graft failures with comparable failure rates between patients receiving LET versus ALLR (2.9% vs. 3.2%, P=0.690). The average QALYs gained was slightly higher for those who received LET (0.77) compared to ALLR (0.75). Survey results revealed a 5 minute longer median self-reported operative time for ALLR (20 ​min) than LET (15 ​min). The estimated costs for LET, autograft ALLR, and allograft ALLR were $1,015, $1,295, and $3,068, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Anterolateral augmentation during primary ACLR with LET is more cost-effective than independent autograft and allograft ALLR given the lower costs and comparable clinical outcomes. Surgeons may utilize this information when determining the optimal approach to anterolateral augmentation during primary ACLR, although differences in preferred technique and health care systems may influence operative efficiency and material costs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review; Level of evidence, IV.

Anatomic Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction with Iliotibial Band Graft and Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) attempts to restore native ACL function. Persistent anterolateral instability is a common symptom after ACLR that can lead to worse patient outcomes. Additional surgeries, like anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR), can augment the ACL graft and help increase anterolateral rotational stability. Certain indications for ACLR with ALLR include high-grade pivot shift, increased posterior tibial slope (>12°), revision ACLR, and concomitant ligamentous or meniscal injuries. We describe an anatomic ALLR technique using an 8 cm long × 1 cm wide strip of the inferior aspect of the iliotibial band fixed at the native attachment sites of the ALL.

A Novel Ligamentous Complex in the Anteromedial Region of the Knee: A Cadaveric Study

Background

The medial knee structures have a primary role in stabilizing valgus and rotational stress, which makes them important in assessing the ligament-injured knee globally and choosing the most adequate treatment.

Purpose

To conduct a layer-by-layer dissection of the knee's anteromedial side and provide a qualitative and quantitative description of the anatomy and histology of a ligament in the anteromedial region of the knee, which we have termed the anterior oblique ligament (AOL). Also, to describe the AOL relationship with what we have termed the medial cross-a ligament complex that stabilizes the medial pivot.

Study Design

Descriptive laboratory study.

Methods

A total of 35 fresh-frozen knees from transfemoral amputations that were exclusively performed for vascular reasons were dissected. Structures were identified after meticulous dissection, respecting the same protocol, measured with a digital caliper rule, and histologically studied for data.

Results

The AOL was found in all dissected knees, with a mean length of 31.47 ± 5.06 mm. This structure presented a ligament histology with densely organized collagen fibrils. The medial cross was represented by the superficial medial collateral ligament, AOL (anterior region), and posterior oblique ligament.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated the presence of a ligament in the anteromedial region of the knee, termed the AOL. This structure was in the anterior part of a ligament complex-the medial cross.

Clinical Relevance

Studying and revisiting the medial compartment can provide important information for understanding joint instability and promoting better results in ligament reconstructions.

Return to the Pre-Injury Level of Sport after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Practical Review with Medical Recommendations

Returning to sport after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) can be a challenging and complex process for the athlete, with the rate of return to the pre-injury level of sport observed to be less than athlete expectations. Of the athletes that do return to sport (RTS), knee re-injury rates remain high, and multiple studies have observed impaired athletic performance upon RTS after ACLR as well as reduced playing time, productivity, and career lengths. To mitigate re-injury and improve RTS outcomes, multiple RTS after ACLR consensus statements/clinical practice guidelines have recommended objective RTS testing criteria to be met prior to medical clearance for unrestricted sports participation. While the achievement of RTS testing criteria can improve RTS rates after ACLR, current criteria do not appear valid for predicting safe RTS. Therefore, there is a need to review the various factors related to the successful return to the pre-injury level of sport after ACLR, clarify the utility of objective performance testing and RTS criteria, further discuss safe RTS decision-making as well as present strategies to reduce the risk of ACL injury/re-injury upon RTS. This article provides a practical review of the current RTS after ACLR literature, as well as makes medical recommendations for rehabilitation and RTS decision-making after ACLR.

Editorial Commentary: Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair or Reconstruction With Internal Bracing, for Properly Indicated Patients, Is Safe, Biocompatible, and Biomimetic

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with internal bracing (IB)-and ACL repair with IB when indicated-reduces graft or repair failure. IB is safe and protects ligament reconstructions and repairs. The IB construct should not be misunderstood as a synthetic ligament. To be effective, suture tape must be independently secured with the knee in full extension, reflecting the terminal length of the ACL. Regardless of graft type, the graft must be cyclically tensioned independent of the IB to allow for creep, and when properly performed, this significantly increases the ultimate tensile strength of the construct and reduces graft elongation, without stress shielding. Thus, the generic term "suture augmentation" may be misleading because the successful results reported apply to the IB technique. In our experience, the failure rate after ACL reconstruction with IB is 1% at the 5-year follow-up period. Notably, these results were achieved without an additional lateral extra-articular procedure.

Does an early post traumatic knee brace reduce the incidence of knee rotational instability?

PURPOSE

Several anterolateral stabilization procedures have been developed recently to address rotational instability of the knee. Currently, these procedures tend to be systematically used by some practitioners. However, antero-lateral structures of the knee (including the anterolateral ligament, ALL) have a self-healing potential which can reduce the need to perform an antero-lateral procedure. In this study, it was hypothesized that early post-traumatic immobilization of the knee with a knee brace would allow partial healing of antero-lateral structures and also allow control of the pivot shift, thus avoiding antero-lateral extra-articular stabilization. The objective of this study was to compare the severity of pivot shift between two groups of patients who all experienced anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear and respectively underwent post-traumatic immobilization of the knee versus no immobilization.

METHODS

This was a comparative, multicentric (three centers' study) retrospective, consecutive study including 168 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between May and September 2022. The application or not of post-traumatic immobilization and its duration, the severity of pivot shift observed in the operating room under general anesthesia, the presence of anterolateral lesions as revealed by MRI and the patients' pre-injury sport activity were recorded.

RESULTS

A grade 3 pivot shift was found in 44 patients (27%). It was more frequently observed in the group without a brace compared to the group with a knee brace (18 patients out of 36: 50% versus 26 patients out of 132: 19.7%; p = 0.0012). Wearing a brace, whether hinged (OR = 0.221, [0.070-0.652]; p = 0.006) or not (OR = 0.232, [0.076-0.667]; p = 0.0064), was protective from the risk of developing a significant pivot shift.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the presence of pivot-shift was lower in the patients that had an early post-injury knee brace before their ACL reconstruction. Based on this result, systematic brace placement could be advocated for in patients after knee trauma.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, prognostic retrospective case-control study.

Routine Use of Suture Tape Augmentation for Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Surgery Is Not Justified

High rates of graft failure after primary ACLR and the need for revision ACLR continue to be a challenge. Multiple studies demonstrate graft failure rates and the need for revision ACLR in 10% to 15% of young patients participating in pivot sporting activities. There's currently a wide range of strategies to mitigate this problem being investigated, including extraarticular augmentation (with modified lateral extra-articular tenodesis or anterolateral ligament reconstruction) and intraarticular fixation (that aim for primary ACL healing or augmentation of an ACL reconstruction with suture tape). While the early data on suture tape augmentation of primary ACLR seems optimistic, it does not justify its routine use.

Evaluation of Graft Maturation by MRI in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With and Without Concomitant Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction

Background

Single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (SB-ACLR) with concomitant anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) has been associated with better clinical results when compared with isolated SB-ACLR. However, it is not known whether the improved outcomes are the result of the influence of concomitant ALLR on ACL graft healing.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to determine whether concomitant ALLR is associated with improved graft ligamentization after SB-ACLR. It was hypothesized that ALLR would not affect graft healing.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A 1 to 1 matching study was conducted on a consecutive series of 732 patients who underwent ACLR using a hamstring tendon autograft between 2007 and 2019. Patients were excluded if they had skeletal immaturity, inflammatory joint disease, multiple ligament reconstruction (other than ALLR), or a graft rupture. Patients with concomitant SB-ACLR and ALLR (SB-ACLR/ALLR) and isolated SB-ACLR were matched 1 to 1 based on age, sex, examination under anesthesia (EUA) grade 3 pivot shift, EUA grade 3 anterior drawer test, presence of graft impingement, sagittal graft angle, skeletal maturity, lack of generalized ligamentous laxity, and multiple ligamentous injury. A total of 40 matched pairs underwent postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) within the second year after surgery to assess graft ligamentization, which was measured by the signal-to-noise quotient (SNQ) of the ACL graft.

Results

The mean follow-up period was 41 months, with a 2-year follow-up rate of 80% in the SB-ACLR/ALLR group and 98% in the isolated SB-ACLR group. The mean duration between the index operation and MRI was 16.4 ± 3.4 months. No significant difference was observed in the SNQ of the ACL graft between the SB-ACLR/ALLR and SB-ACLR groups (6.9 ± 4.6 vs 5.2 ± 4.8, respectively; P = .066).

Conclusion

Study findings indicated that a concomitant ALLR at the time of hamstring tendon autograft ACLR did not affect graft healing as assessed by the SNQ of the ACL graft.

Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Decreases Passive Anterior Tibial Subluxation Compared With Isolated Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Despite Similar Rotational Stability and Clinical Outcomes

PURPOSE

To analyze the effect of augmenting a hamstring autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with an anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) on a primary outcome of passive anterior tibial subluxation (PATS) and a secondary outcome of the clinical outcomes.

METHODS

ACL-injured patients who underwent primary ACLR between March 2014 and February 2020 at our center were enrolled. Patients who underwent combined procedures (ACLR + ALLR) were matched in a 1:1 propensity ratio to patients who underwent ACLR only. We evaluated PATS, knee stability (side-to-side laxity difference, pivot-shift test), and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after the procedure and documented complications.

RESULTS

From an initial cohort of 252 patients with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years (48.4 ± 16.6 months), 35 matched pairs were included, and 17 patients (48.6%) in each group underwent second-look arthroscopy. The combined ACLR + ALLR group showed significantly better improvement of PATS in the lateral compartments than the isolated ACLR group (P = .034). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding knee stability (side-to-side laxity difference, pivot-shift test), PROMs, complications, and second-look arthroscopic findings (all P > .05). Moreover, the proportions of patients who achieved the minimal clinically important difference in PROMs were not different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined ACLR + ALLR procedure was associated with a mean improvement in anterior tibial subluxation for the lateral compartment that was 1.2 mm better than an isolated ACLR procedure, despite its lack of clinical significance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, cohort study.

Comparison Between Continuous and Separate Grafts for ALL Reconstruction When Combined With ACL Reconstruction: A Retrospective Cohort Study From the SANTI Study Group

BACKGROUND

While various techniques have been described to augment the anterolateral side of the knee, such as lateral extra-articular tenodesis and anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction (ALLR), it is unclear how they affect clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare the results of 2 ALLR techniques for combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)/ALL reconstruction.

HYPOTHESIS

The graft rupture rate, complications, and patient-reported outcomes are similar between a reconstruction technique using a continuous gracilis graft (CG) and single femoral tunnel for ACL/ALL reconstruction, and one using a separate gracilis graft (SG) and independent femoral tunnels.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of data collected prospectively at 2 hospitals was conducted: one in which a CG is preferred when performing combined ACL/ALL reconstruction and the other in which an SG is preferred. The medical records at these 2 hospitals were searched to identify ACL-deficient patients who had undergone ACL/ALL reconstruction between 2015 and 2020. Eligible patients were between 18 and 60 years of age, had the reconstruction surgery done within 24 months of the injury, and had ≥2 years of follow-up. The eligible patients were contacted to gather outcomes, or their outcomes were collected in person during their last follow-up visit. Outcomes evaluated included graft rupture rate, complication rate, and Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF) scores. Preoperative and intraoperative data were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 237 patients were available for analysis in the GC group and 178 in the SG group with a mean follow-up of 3 years (CG: SD, 9.6 months; SG: SD, 8.1 months). The authors found a low rate of graft rupture (CG: 3.4%; SG: 2.8%; P = .785) and no difference between techniques. The complication rate was 6% in the CG group, while it was 10% in the SG group (P = .112). The mean value of the IKDC-SKF was similar between techniques (CG: 88.1; SG: 87.9; P = .267), and the mean Lysholm score was excellent in both sets of patients (CG: 90.0; SG: 92.4; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This study found little to no difference in the graft rupture rate, complication rate, and functional knee scores when using a CG or SG for ALLR during combined ACL/ALL reconstruction. Both techniques are equivalent and can be used for an anterolateral augmentation procedure in combination with ACL reconstruction.

Return to Sports After ACL Augmentation With Anterolateral Reconstruction (ALR) Harvesting Gracilis Only Compared With ACL Reconstruction With ALR Harvesting Both Hamstring Tendons

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair (ACL-Rp) is known to be a valuable alternative to ACL reconstruction (ACL-Rc) in selected indications. The majority of the ACL-Rp techniques recommend the use of a synthetic brace. The use of the gracilis allows both a biological internal brace and anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALR).

PURPOSE

The primary objective was to compare the early ability to return to sports between patients who underwent ACL-Rp using a gracilis autograft as an internal brace augmentation with ALR and patients who underwent the conventional ACL-Rc with ALR technique sacrificing both the gracilis and the semitendinosus. The secondary objective was to compare the failure rate, clinical scores, and return to sports at a minimum follow-up of 2 years.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was undertaken. A total of 49 patients who underwent ACL-Rp with ALR between December 2018 and May 2019 were propensity matched at a 1:1 ratio to those who underwent ACL-Rc with ALR during the same period. The decision to perform ACL-Rp with ALR was based on preoperative selection and intraoperative arthroscopic findings: proximal avulsion tear, partial ACL tear, low- to midlevel sports participation, and good tissue quality. The ability to return to sports was assessed using isokinetic tests and the Knee Santy Athletic Return to Sport test functional test at 6 months postoperatively. At the final follow-up, knee laxity parameters, return to sports, and clinical outcome (Lysholm score, Tegner Activity Scale score, International Knee Documentation Committee score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury score) were recorded.

RESULTS

The ACL-Rp group had significantly less hamstring strength deficit when compared with their counterparts who underwent ACL-Rc (0.2% vs 10.2% in concentric, P < .001; 2.5% vs 14% in eccentric, P < .001). The mean Knee Santy Athletic Return to Sport test score was significantly higher in the ACL-Rc group (69.7% ± 16.6% [range, 19%-100%] vs 61% ± 16.8% [range, 19%-100%]; P = .001). In the ACL-Rp group, 61% (30/49) of the patients were authorized to return to pivot sports versus 41% (20/49) in the ACL-Rc group (P = .04). At a mean final follow-up of 31.4 ± 3.5 months, no significant differences were demonstrated between groups with respect to clinical scores and knee laxity parameters. There was a trend for a higher failure rate in the ACL-Rp group without any significance (ACL-Rp: 6.1% [3/49] vs ACL-Rc: 0%; P = .08).

CONCLUSION

At 6 months after operation, harvesting only the gracilis with this ACL-Rp and augmentation with ALR technique was linked to a better early ability to return to sports compared with the ACL-Rc with ALR technique harvesting both the gracilis and semitendinosus. This technique had a limited effect on early flexion strength and provided a satisfactory rerupture rate.

Standardized multi-planar reformation improves the reliability of the assessment of the anterolateral ligament in ACL-deficient knees

PURPOSE

The anterolateral ligament (ALL) is an important structure for controlling anterolateral rotatory stability of the knee. Its assessment, however, is difficult using standardized MRI images. The goal of this study was to assess the reliability of judging the integrity of the ALL on multi-planar reformatted (MPR) MRI images and on standard coronal reformatted (SCR) MRI images in knees with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture.

METHODS

Forty-eight patients (14 females, 34 males, 30 ± 6 years (mean age ± standard deviation)) with acute ACL ruptures (< 2 weeks) and no additional knee injuries (except segond fractures) were included. Images were assessed by two independent raters twice with at least a 2-week interval in between. The assessment was first performed on SCR images and thereafter on MPR images. Images were judged for assessability of the ALL and then the integrity of the ALL was rated.

RESULTS

Depending on rater and read, the ALL was judged as "torn" in between 5 (10.4%) and 11 (22.9%) patients out of 48 patients on SCR images. On MRP images, the ALL was judged as "torn" in between 5 (10.4%) and 6 (12.5%) patients out of 48 patients, depending on rater and read. Inter- and intra-rater reliability for the assessment of the ALL using MPR images was "substantial" to "almost perfect". Inter- and intra-rater reliability for the assessment using SCR was "fair" to "substantial".

CONCLUSION

MPR images should be used when assessing the integrity of the ALL. Assessment quality is independent of patient positioning during MRI acquisition and the ALL can be displayed in full length on one image.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision Plus Lateral Extra-Articular Procedure Results in Superior Stability and Lower Failure Rates Than Does Isolated Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision but Shows No Difference in Patient-Reported Outcomes or Return to Sports

PURPOSE

To determine whether comparative clinical studies demonstrate significant advantages of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (RACLR) combined with a lateral extra-articular procedure (LEAP), with respect to graft rupture rates, knee stability, return to sport rates, and patient-reported outcome measures, compared with isolated RACLR.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses Guidelines. A PubMed search was conducted using the key words "revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction" combined with any of the following additional terms, "lateral extra-articular tenodesis" OR "anterolateral ligament reconstruction" OR "Lemaire." All relevant comparative clinical studies were included. Key clinical data were extracted and evaluated.

RESULTS

Eight comparative studies (seven Level III studies and a one Level IV study) were identified and included. Most studies reported more favorable outcomes with combined procedures with respect to failure rates (0%-13% following RACLR+LEAP, and 4.4%-21.4% following isolated RACLR), postoperative side-to-side anteroposterior laxity difference (1.3-3.9 mm following RACLR+LEAP and 1.8-5.9 mm following isolated RACLR), and high-grade pivot shift (0%-11.1% following RACLR+LEAP and 10.2%-23.8% in patients following isolated RACLR). There were no consistent differences between isolated and combined procedures with respect to return to sport or patient-reported outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review demonstrates that the addition of a LEAP to RACLR was associated with an advantage with respect to ACL graft failure rates and avoidance of high-grade postoperative knee laxity across almost all included studies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, Systematic review of level III to IV studies.