The Effect of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis in an ACL-Reconstructed Knee With Partial Medial Meniscectomy: A Biomechanical Study

Satisfactory 5-year functional outcomes following primary ACL reconstructions from the UK National Ligament Registry

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to describe the 10-year findings from the UK National Ligament Registry (NLR).

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed for prospectively collected data on the NLR between January 2013 and December 2022. All patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR) on the registry were included. Surgical characteristics were analysed, including surgeon grade and case volume, concomitant knee procedures, venous thromboembolic prophylaxis, graft characteristics, femoral and tibial tunnel drilling, and fixation methods. Clinical outcomes were collected preoperatively and at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years following the index procedure.

RESULTS

During the study period, 17,492 unilateral ACLR procedures were recorded. Autograft was used in 98%, most commonly a combined semitendinosus and gracilis graft (77%) or patella tendon graft (31%). Allograft was used in only 1% of the patients. In 52% of cases, ACLR was associated with an additional procedure, with isolated medial meniscal surgery being the most common (21%). Femoral tunnel drilling was mostly performed through an anteromedial portal (73%) and tibial tunnel drilling using an outside-in technique (92%). The most common method of femoral graft fixation was with an Endobutton fixed loop suspensory device (77%), while interference screws predominated for tibial tunnel fixation (86%). Patients who underwent ACLR surgery showed significant improvement in their functional outcome scores at six months, 1 year, 2 years and 5 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Data from the NLR shows a detailed description of the current trends and evolution of ACLR in the United Kingdom over the last 10 years. Satisfactory functional outcomes were observed 5 years postoperatively. This study provides useful information on the prevalence of ACL-associated injuries and current surgical techniques with the aim of improving the quality of clinical care and patients' outcomes. Moreover, it provides surgeons with a benchmark against which to compare current practices and functional outcomes following ACLR across the United Kingdom.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Risk factors of knee reinjury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate whether the return to level I sports, concomitant injuries, foot-related problems, and other factors would increase the risk of knee reinjury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

METHODS

This study used a prospective cohort study design. Online enrolment from August 2018 to January 2019 in ACL Community Indonesia recruited 148 patients who had undergone ACLR less than one month prior to injury. Knee injury occurrence after ACLR was diagnosed through a physical examination and positive MRI or arthroscopic findings.

RESULTS

During the study, 55 knee reinjuries occurred. The proportional hazards model analysis revealed that the risk of knee reinjury at 12 and 24 months for patients who returned to level I sports (hazards ratio (HR)=3.17 and HR=3.90, respectively) was significantly higher than that of the patients who did not return to sports and that the risk for those who returned to level II/III sports did not significantly increase at 12 or 24 months. Patients with concomitant meniscus injury had a significantly higher risk of knee reinjury at 12 and 24 months (HR=3.33 and HR=2.25, respectively) than those without, and the risk of knee reinjury for patients with concomitant posterior cruciate ligament injury was significantly higher at 12 months (HR=3.05) but not at 24 months. Fewer knee symptoms after ACLR were significantly associated with a lower risk of knee reinjury (HR=0.98) at 12 and 24 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The return to level I sports, concomitant meniscus and posterior cruciate ligament injury, and knee symptoms after ACLR may increase the risk of knee reinjury for post-ACLR patients.

Editorial Commentary: Knee Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Procedures: Appropriate Study Design Is Essential for Reducing Conflicting Findings and Unnecessary Controversy in the Orthopaedic Literature

Knee lateral extra-articular tenodesis procedures (LEAPs) reduce graft rupture rates when performed at the time of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, in the setting of revision ACL reconstruction, LEAPs are less studied and remain controversial. Many studies support combined procedures (ACL + LEAP), yet others do not. When the literature comprises small patient cohorts and short follow-up periods, conflicting results often arise. The controversy surrounding them may be unnecessarily generated by the publication of low-quality studies. Future studies should focus on adequate power; appropriate design and methodology, including matching or randomization to account for potential confounding factors; proper statistical analyses; and avoidance of spin bias.

Why Your Patient May Need an ACL Reconstruction Plus Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Procedure

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears are one of the most common knee injuries experienced by active individuals engaging in cutting sports. Despite improved surgical techniques and rehabilitation, the return to sport rate and re-tear rates remain unsatisfactory. Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) is a procedure that has been growing in interest when performed in conjunction with ACL reconstruction. The benefits of adding an LET procedure to an ACL surgery may include greater rotational stability, decreased re-tear rates, and improved return to play. Level of evidence: V.