Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Autologous Hamstrings Augmented With the Ligament Augmentation and Reconstruction System Versus Hamstrings Alone: A Comparative Cohort Study

Synthetic augmentation in ACL reconstruction may reduce re-rupture rates and increase return-to-sport rates: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Synthetic augmentation (SA) in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) aims to enhance graft durability, but its benefits remain unclear. To evaluate whether SA in ACLR improves return-to-sport (RTS) rates, reduces graft failure, enhances patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and varies in effectiveness across materials and techniques.

METHODS

A systematic search of five databases was conducted until February 2025. Comparative studies were pooled using Hedges' random-effects meta-analysis with subgroup analysis based on materials and publication year. Non-comparative studies were analysed narratively. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tools for randomised studies. Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies were included (n = 4289): 7 randomised and 40 non-randomised studies (21 comparative; 19 non-comparative). SA systems included InternalBrace (FiberTape, 16 studies), Ligament Augmentation and Reconstruction System (polyester, 5), Ligament Augmentation Device (polyethylene, 18) and other materials (8). GRADE assessment showed moderate-certainty evidence for improved mid-term RTS rate from eight studies (odds ratio [OR]: 1.58; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.12-2.22; N = 716; I2 = 0%; p = 0.01). Internal brace showed a reduction in re-rupture rates in the long-term (OR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.04-0.64; N = 218; I2 = 0%; p = 0.01); however, pooled analysis of all techniques showed no statistically significant difference. Contemporary studies showed a better return to sport rates with SA. PROs showed no clinically meaningful differences. Non-comparative studies showed low graft failure rates (<8.7% for InternalBrace; <16.4% for other SA), high RTS rates (>90% for InternalBrace; >56.7% for other SA) and satisfactory PROs.

CONCLUSIONS

SA, particularly InternalBrace, may improve RTS rates and reduce re-rupture risk, though PROs remain inconclusive. Findings are limited by a moderate-to-serious risk of bias, emphasising the need for high-quality research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Early clinical outcomes of all-inside arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autograft tendon augmentation using the LARS internal brace ligament

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the early clinical outcomes of all-inside anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using hamstring tendons augmented using the ligament augmentation and reconstruction system (LARS) versus hamstring tendons alone as a control.

Methods

This study included 99 patients with ACL injuries who underwent all-inside arthroscopic ACL reconstruction using either the LARS internal brace ligament combined with hamstring tendon (augmentation group, n = 48) or hamstring tendon alone (hamstring group, n = 51). Postoperative follow-up was conducted using Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner, KOS-ADLS, and ACL-RSI scores to evaluate functional recovery of patients at 1, 3, and 6 months. If necessary, MRI findings obtained at postoperative 3 months were also analyzed to evaluate graft integration and healing dynamics. Tensile strength of the augmented graft was measured through tensile testing. Moreover, to evaluate the postoperative healing status of the augmented tendon, an ACL reconstruction model was established using New Zealand white rabbits. At 4 and 8 weeks postimplantation, rabbit knees were harvested, decalcified, embedded in paraffin, and stained to evaluate new tissue formation. All statistical analyses were conducted using the GraphPad Prism and SPSS software, with appropriate statistical tests applied for comparison between groups.

Results

At 1-month postoperative follow-up, the LARS augmentation group demonstrated significantly higher Lysholm, IKDC, and KOS-ADLS scores than the hamstring group, with P < 0.01 for all comparisons. At 3-month postoperative follow-up, the augmentation group exhibited significantly higher Tegner, Lysholm, IKDC, and KOS-ADLS scores than the hamstring group, with P < 0.05 for all measurements. In the tensile testing, the tendons + LARS and LARS groups showed significantly higher maximum loads and lower elongation than the tendon group with P < 0.001 for maximum load and P < 0.05 for elongation. Examination of the histological sections at 4 and 8 weeks showed that the LARS ligament exhibited excellent biocompatibility, with abundant collagen fibers and neovascularization identified between its fibers.

Conclusion

The combination of LARS internal brace ligaments with autograft tendons in ACL reconstruction provides superior early postoperative outcomes, improving knee stability and patient satisfaction with no remarkable complications. The augmented graft exhibited reliable tensile strength and favorable tissue integration.

The effectiveness of quadrupled semitendinosus graft technique in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A network meta-analysis assessing various graft preparation techniques

PURPOSE

This study aims to perform a network meta-analysis of hamstring graft preparation techniques to enhance anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction guidelines and inform clinical decision-making in patients with primary ACL rupture.

METHODS

A review of the literature, from 1 January 1990, to 31 August 2023, was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, focusing on the clinical outcomes of various hamstring graft preparation techniques. Forty-six studies (over 4800 knees) were analysed. Eight graft compositions: doubled hamstring (ST/G)-1978 grafts, doubled hamstring with augmentation (ST/G+A)-586 grafts, tripled semitendinosus (3ST)-124 grafts, quadrupled semitendinosus (4ST)-1273 grafts, five-strand tripled semitendinosus + doubled gracilis (3ST/2GR-839 grafts, six-strand tripled semitendinosus + tripled gracilis (3ST/3GR)-335 grafts, seven-strand quadrupled semitendinosus + tripled gracilis (4ST/3GR)-11 grafts and ≥eight strands-24 grafts were compared, considering graft sizes, laxity, muscle strength, range-of-motion, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), return to sport (RTS) and adverse events.

RESULTS

The 4ST grafts fared better than the ST/G grafts in the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Sport, KOOS Q and RTS (mean difference [MD], -1.69; p = 0.0159; MD, -1.55; p = 0.0325; MD, -1.93; p = 0.001; odds ratio: 3.13; p < 0.0001). The IKDC differed significantly between the 4ST and ST/G+A groups (MD, 1.88; p = 0.046). The ST/G+A resulted in the lowest knee laxity, surpassing the ST/G, 3ST and 4ST. The ST/G had the smallest diameter (ST/G vs. ST/G+A: MD, 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67-1.86, p < 0.0001). Reduced failure rates were noted with the 3ST/2GR (3ST/2GR vs. ST/G: MD, 6.93; p = 0.009) and 3ST/3GR (3ST/3GR vs. ST/G: MD, 53.64; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

The ideal hamstring graft for ACLR should be individualized. A 4ST graft is likely to yield good PROMs. For high stability and rapid RTS, adding augmentation to the graft is advisable. The ST/G is the thinnest graft possible.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Network meta-analysis of level I-III studies.

Combining an internal tension relieving technique with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) reduces graft failure rate and improves functional outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Graft rupture is a significant cause of graft failure in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). To address this issue, clinicians have combined the internal tension relieving technique (ITRT) with ACLR to improve graft stiffness, aiming to reduce the risk of graft failure. The purpose of this study is to compare the graft failure rates and clinical functional outcomes between ITRT-assisted ACLR and conventional ACLR.

METHODS

Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a search was conducted in databases including Ovid, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, Wanfang Data, CNKI, and VIP Medical Database for clinical controlled trials comparing the ITRT combined with ACLR to conventional ACLR. The search period spanned from the establishment of the databases to September 2024. Studies meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected, with two independent reviewers conducting literature screening, quality assessment, and data extraction. Data analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. The evaluated outcomes included graft failure rate, Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Tegner activity score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), return to sport (RTS) rate, and knee joint laxity.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies were included in the final analysis, with 1,339 patients (592 patients with ITRT-assisted ACLR and 747 patients with conventional ACLR). The combined analysis results indicated that, compared to conventional ACLR, ITRT-assisted ACLR showed significant advantages in reducing graft failure rates (RR = 0.44; 95% CI: 0.23, 0.83; P = 0.01), increasing return-to-sport rates (MD = 1.75; 95% CI: 1.05, 2.91; P = 0.03), and improving knee scores (including KOOS score and Tegner activity score) (all P values < 0.05). However, no significant differences were observed between the two approaches in terms of Lysholm knee score, VAS score, IKDC score, and knee joint laxity.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis highlighted the significance and superiority of combining ITRT with ACLR compared to conventional ACLR, particularly in reducing graft failure rate and improving knee function outcomes. The ITRT-assisted ACLR procedure may represent the optimal approach for minimizing graft failure. However, given the limitations of short-term follow-up and reliance on retrospective studies, more randomized controlled trials and longer follow-up periods are needed to further evaluate the long-term graft failure rates and functional outcomes.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with LARS Synthetic Ligament: Outcomes and Failures

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are common in athletes, but their prevalence has also increased among adults. ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is a key treatment option, with graft choice playing a critical role in recovery. The study evaluates the clinical and functional outcomes of ACLR using the Ligament Augmentation and Reconstruction System (LARS) in patients over 35 years old. It assesses implant survival, failure rate, and revision rate, and measures quality of life and subjective outcomes. Methods: Fifty-three patients were finally included in this retrospective two-center study. The study assessed quality of life (QoL) and subjective outcomes using IKDC and Lysholm scores, evaluated implant survival and revision rates, and assessed the difference in activity levels between the two years before ACL injury and at follow-up. Results: The study found high Lysholm (90.61) and IKDC (80.25) scores, indicating positive clinical results. However, about 40% of patients did not return to their pre-injury activity levels. The graft failure rate was low at 3.8%, with no cases of infection or implant rejection. Conclusions: The study concluded that LARS ACLR is an effective option for middle-aged patients, offering faster recovery and fewer complications. However, it may not be suitable for younger, professional athletes due to its mechanical limitations. Further research with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up is recommended.

Hamstring tendon graft with LARS augmentation showed superior short-term clinical efficacy compared to hamstring tendon alone as graft in ACL reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There have been emerging clinical trials investigating the efficacy of synthetic-graft-augmented autografts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in recent years. Hamstring tendon and Ligament Augmentation and Reconstruction System (LARS) are both widely discussed graft choices for ACLR.

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical efficacy of hamstring tendon grafts with LARS-augmented hamstring tendon grafts in ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify primary evidence related to the comparison of ACLR with a hamstring tendon (HT) versus a hamstring tendon with LARS (HT + LARS). Quality assessment of the included studies was conducted using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-RCTs. Quantitative analysis was conducted with Reviewer Manager 5.4. The primary outcomes compared were the Lysholm scale, Tegnar activity scale, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) evaluation, KT-1000-based laxity, complication/retear rate and rate of return-to-sports. The secondary outcomes were the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS), Global Rating of Change (GRC) scale, hop tests, isokinetic knee strength tests and radiographic and arthroscopic evaluations.

RESULTS

Six cohort studies with 710 participants were included in this study. Compared with the HT group, the HT + LARS group had better Lysholm scores at the 1-year follow-up (P = 0.0007) and at the final follow-up (P = 0.04). HT + LARS group had better IKDC scores at the 1-year follow-up (P = 0.003). The HT + LARS group had a better return-to-sports rate in short term. No significant difference in complications or re-surgery was observed. The secondary results revealed superior or non-inferior outcomes in the HT + LARS group.

CONCLUSIONS

As grafts for ACLR, the use of hamstring tendons with LARS augmentation, compared with the use of hamstring tendons alone, in the short term, has significantly superior overall functional results and better early sports participation and non-inferior results in other comparisons. In the long term, the use of hamstring tendon with LARS augmentation demonstrated non-inferior results in terms of functional scores, knee stability, knee strength, complications and re-tear rate, etc.

Lower extremity return to sport testing: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Lower extremity injuries account for an enormous portion of sports medicine cases in the United States each year. Unfortunately, there are no uniform criteria for athletes to complete prior to returning to sport (RTS) following a lower extremity injury. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review is to review current literature for joint-specific and global lower extremity testing to determine the most valid functional test that can be utilized to reduce the risk of re-injury as athletes RTS.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane Library, OVID, and Embase databases was conducted for studies prior to May 2024 following PRISMA guidelines. ROBINS-I Tool was utilized for the risk of bias assessment.

RESULTS

Of 19,189 studies, 114 (0.6%) studies published prior to May of 2024 met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Eighty five percent of articles discussed RTS for individuals with knee pathology. Furthermore, 82% specifically analyzed RTS following ACL reconstruction. The most common RTS test was isokinetic dynamometry testing which is seen in 73% of studies. Only 6.2% of studies analyzed RTS for individuals with hip pathology and only two studies analyzed RTS for patients with ankle injuries.

CONCLUSION

Even with the enormous amount of literature that exists regarding ACL injuries and testing there is no standardized criterion for RTS clearance. The suggested test batteries from this review can serve as a framework for future research and validation for joint-specific RTS functional testing.

A comparative analysis of suture-augmented and standard hamstring autograft single-bundle ACL reconstruction outcomes: short-term functional benefits without long-term impact

BACKGROUND

Augmentation of the biologic graft with nonabsorbable suture material during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a relatively new technique to enhance its biomechanical properties and add additional support to the critical process of healing. We aimed to compare the short-term functional patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complication rates of patients treated with either standard single-bundle four-strand hamstring ACLR or added suture augmentation (SA).

METHODS

Patients undergoing arthroscopic ACLR between February 2015-January 2017 and in the standard ACLR group, and between February 2017-September 2019 in the SA-ACLR group operated by adding a no.5 FiberWire® (Arthrex, Naples, FL, USA) braided suture to the hamstring autograft, were retrospectively reviewed and the PROMs were compared. Patients were followed up for a 24-month period and PROMs were assessed by the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form and Tegner-Lysholm knee score. Patients' demographic and clinical characteristics, and postoperative complications including graft retear requiring revision surgery, deep vein thrombois, and surgical site infection were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

We included 79 patients with mean age of 31.6 ± 8.3 years in the standard ACLR group, and 90 patients with mean oge of 30.5 ± 7.6 in the SA-ACLR group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, sex, body mass index, and medical comorbidities. The values of the IKDC scores increased to 75.8 ± 18.9 in the standard ACLR group, and 85.6 ± 12.6 in the SA-ACLR group, 24 months after the operation (P < 0.05). The 24-month postoperative Tegner-Lysholm scores escalated to 79.3 ± 21.0 in the standard ACLR group and 91.0 ± 13.7 in the SA-ACLR group (P < 0.05). Four (5.1%) patients in the standard ACLR group and 4 (4.4%) in the SA-ACLR group experienced graft retear requiring revision surgery (P > 0.05). Incidence of surgical site infection and deep vein thrombosis showed no significant differences between the two groups, 24 months after ACLR.

CONCLUSION

SA-ACLR is associated with improved short-term functional PROMs compared to the standard hamstring ACLR. Although SA did not reduce the retear rate, and infection and DVT rates did not differ between study groups, superior improvement of PROMs in SA approach, leverages this method for ACLR.

There is no difference in the efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autograft combined with or without ligament augmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aims to determine the efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using autograft combined with or without ligament augmentation.

METHODS

A computerized search of the databases was conducted, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library. Only prospective or retrospective comparative studies with a minimum 2-year follow-up were considered for inclusion. Two independent reviewers performed data extraction and methodological quality assessment. A Mantel-Haenszel analysis was used for the pooling of results. Sensitivity analysis was performed to maintain the stability of results. The egger test was applied to assess the publication bias.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included. The total cohort was 1353 patients (non-augmented group: 763 patients; augmented group: 590 patients). There were three Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs, Level I), six retrospective comparative studies (Level III) and five case-control studies (Level III). The follow-up rate was ≥ 88% and the follow-up periods were ≥ 24 months in all included studies. The augmented graft used to compare with autograft included the Ligament Augmentation Device (LAD), the Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System (LARS) artificial ligament, FiberTape, hamstring tendon allograft, degradable poly (urethane urea). No significant differences were observed between the augmented and non-augmented groups regarding postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including the International Knee Documentation Committee score, Lysholm score and Tegner score, knee laxity, including KT-1000, side-to-side difference, Lachman test and pivot shift and rate of graft failure.

CONCLUSIONS

ACLR using autografts combined with ligament augmentation shows no advantages in PROs, knee laxity and graft failure rate compared with using autografts only.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The research protocol was registered at the PROSPERO database (CRD42022324784).

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with Quadrupled Semitendinosus Graft or Synthetic Ligament: Knee Stability and Clinical Outcomes at Three Years Follow-Up

The incidence of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) surgeries is increasing and graft choice is important for a rapid return to activity, especially in patients older than 30 years. The aim of this study is to compare in term of quality of life and knee stability of patients who undergone ACLR using quadrupled semitendinosus (ST4) graft against patients who undergone ACLR with synthetic ligaments. Thirty-nine patients undergoing ACLR were enrolled in the study and were divided into two groups: ACLR with synthetic ligaments-LARS (group A) and ACLR with quadrupled semitendinosus graft ST4 (group B). They underwent surgery at Policlinico di Bari Orthopedic Unit between January 2017 and January 2020. Group A was composed by nineteen patients (36.16 ± 4.41 mean age-years, 22.47 ± 2.63 mean BMI-kg/m2, 39.37 ± 10.05 mean time evaluation after surgery-months) and group B was composed by twenty patients (34.95 ± 3.59 mean age-years, 21.1 ± 2.88 mean BMI-kg/m2, 36.75 ± 8.69 mean time evaluation after surgery-months). For each patient, the following data were recorded: age; side of injury, BMI, date of surgery, anterior knee laxity with the arthrometer, and Lysholm knee scoring scale. Mean value of anterior tibial translation (ATT) in group A was 3.09 mm ± 0.65 and in group B was 2.66 mm ± 1.61 (pvalue of 0.1139). Mann--Whitney U test used to compare the Lysholm means values between groups showed a pvalue of 0.9307. LARS has comparable clinical and functional outcomes compared with hamstring autografts at short-term of 3 years follow-up. Level of Evidence: IV.

Suture-tape augmentation of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomised controlled trial (STACLR)

BACKGROUND

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction aims to restore anteroposterior and rotatory stability to the knee following ACL injury. This requires the graft to withstand the forces applied during the process of ligamentisation and the rehabilitative period. We hypothesise that the use of suture tape augmentation of single bundle ACL reconstruction (ACLR) will reduce residual knee laxity and improve patient-reported outcomes at 2-year follow-up. We will conduct a 1:1 parallel arm single-centre randomised controlled trial comparing suture tape augmented ACLR to standard ACLR technique.

METHODS

The study design will be a parallel arm 1:1 allocation ratio randomised controlled trial. Sixty-six patients aged 18 and over waitlisted for primary ACLR will be randomised. Patients requiring osteotomy and extra-articular tenodesis and who have had previous contralateral ACL rupture or repair of meniscal or cartilage pathology that modifies the post-operative rehabilitation will be excluded. The primary outcome measure will be the side-to-side difference in anterior tibial translation (measured on the GNRB arthrometer) at 24 months post-surgery. GNRB arthrometer measures will also be taken preoperatively, at 3 months and 12 months post-surgery. Secondary outcomes will include patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collected online, including quality of life, activity and readiness to return to sport, complication rates (return to theatre, graft failure and rates of sterile effusion), examination findings and return to sport outcomes. Participants will be seen preoperatively, at 6 weeks, 3 months, 12 months and 24 months post-surgery. Participants and those taking arthrometer measures will be blinded to allocation.

DISCUSSION

This will be the first randomised trial to investigate the effect of suture-tape augmentation of ACLR on either objective or subjective outcome measures. The use of suture-tape augmentation in ACLR has been associated with promising biomechanical and animal-level studies, exhibiting equivalent complication profiles to the standard technique, with initial non-comparative clinical studies establishing possible areas of advantage for the technique. The successful completion of this trial will allow for an improved understanding of the in situ validity of tape augmentation whilst potentially providing a further platform for surgical stabilisation of the ACL graft.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12621001162808. Universal Trial Number (UTN): U1111-1268-1487. Registered prospectively on 27 August 2021.

Good clinical scores, no evidence of excessive anterior tibial translation, a high return to sport rate and a low re-injury rate is observed following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autologous hamstrings augmented with suture tape

INTRODUCTION

Augmented anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) techniques have been proposed to reduce the high reported re-injury rates and low rates of return to sport (RTS). This study reports clinical outcomes, RTS and re-injury rates in patients undergoing ACLR using autologous hamstrings augmented with suture tape.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 53 patients were prospectively recruited, undergoing ACLR using hamstrings with suture tape augmentation, combined with a structured rehabilitation programme. Outcomes were collected to 24 months, including patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), KT-1000 measurements, peak isokinetic knee strength and a four hop test battery. Limb Symmetry Indices (LSIs) were calculated for performance measures, whilst RTS rates, re-tears and re-operations were presented.

RESULTS

There were no significant side-to-side differences in anterior tibial translation between the operated and non-operated knees at 6 months (p = 0.433), with no increase (p = 0.841) in side-to-side anterior tibial translation from 6 to 24 months. At 24 months, 98.0% of patients demonstrated normal (< 3 mm) or near normal (3-5 mm) side-to-side differences. LSIs for peak knee extensor torque (p < 0.0001) and the single (p = 0.001), triple (p = 0.001) and triple crossover (p < 0.0001) hop tests for distance significantly improved. All PROMs significantly improved (p < 0.0001), with 70.2% and 85.7% of patients actively participating in pivoting sports at 12 and 24 months, respectively. Three patients underwent secondary procedures for meniscal symptoms. One patient suffered an ACL re-tear (17 months), with no further ipsilateral or contralateral injuries.

CONCLUSION

ACLR with suture tape augmentation demonstrated no evidence of excessive anterior tibial translation, high-scoring PROMs, sound performance scores, a high rate of RTS and low re-injury rate.

Tourniquet Use Improves Intraoperative Parameters, Leading to Similar Postoperative Outcomes Compared With No Tourniquet Use in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

To examine the effect of tourniquet use in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in terms of: (1) intraoperative visualization with operative time and consumption of sterile saline, and (2) intra- and postoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, opioid consumption, swelling, serum creatine phosphokinase (CPK) and hemoglobin (Hb) concentrations, clinical outcomes, and graft healing.

METHODS

In this prospective randomized clinical trial, patients were assigned to tourniquet inflation (tourniquet-up) or tourniquet deflation (tourniquet-down) groups. Primary outcomes were intraoperative visualization with operative time and sterile saline consumption. Secondary outcomes were intra- and postoperative blood loss, postoperative pain, opioid consumption, swelling, serum CPK, Hb concentration, subjective and objective functional scores, and graft healing.

RESULTS

Intraoperative visualization was satisfactory in 100 of 100 cases in the tourniquet-up group and 64 of 100 cases in the tourniquet-down group (P < .05). The mean operative time was 58.4 ± 5.7 minutes in the tourniquet-up group and 72.5 ± 8.6 minutes in the tourniquet-down group (P < .05). The mean sterile saline consumption was 6.4 ± 2.5 L in the tourniquet-up group and 8.7 ± 4.6 L in the tourniquet-down group (P < .05). The respective amounts of estimated intraoperative and postoperative blood loss were 95.3 ± 25.1 mL and 240.3 ± 44.5 mL in the tourniquet-up group and 230.2 ± 22.3 mL and 75.6 ± 15.3 mL in the tourniquet-down group (P < .05). Our results showed no significant difference in postoperative pain, opioid consumption, percentage of patients using opioids, swelling, mean serum CPK and Hb levels, subjective and objective functional scores, or graft healing (P > .05) between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Tourniquet use during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction significantly improves intraoperative visualization, shortens operative time, and decreases intraoperative sterile saline consumption and blood loss without serious adverse events or greater complication rates based on early postoperative outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, randomized controlled trial.

Clinical and arthroscopic outcomes of single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autologous hamstrings augmented with ligament augmentation and reconstruction systems compared with four-strand hamstring tendon grafts alone

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical, radiological, and second-look arthroscopic outcomes in patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using a four-strand hamstring tendon graft (hamstring group) either without augmentation or with ligament augmentation and reconstruction system (LARS) augmentation (LARS augmentation group).

METHODS

From January 2018 to December 2019, patients who underwent ACL reconstruction were included. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were undertaken pre-operatively and at three, six, 12, and 24 months post-operatively. Arthroscopic evaluation was performed focusing on the morphology of the graft based on graft tension, graft tear, and synovial coverage.

RESULTS

A total of 178 consecutive patients received single-bundle ACL reconstruction, 89 patients in each group, and 20 patients were lost to follow-up in the first two years. At the three month follow-up, the LARS augmentation group had significantly higher Lysholm scores, IKDC scores, and KOS-ADLS scores than the hamstring group (P < 0.001). At the three, six and 12-month follow-ups, there were significantly higher Tegner scores and ACL-RSI scores in the LARS augmentation group than in the hamstring group (P < 0.05). At the three and six month follow-ups, the LARS augmentation group had significantly higher rates of return to sports and return to sports at their preinjury level (P < 0.05). There were no between-group differences in other outcomes, including arthroscopic outcomes, graft signal intensity, post-operative complications or rerupture rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Autologous hamstring augmented with the LARS augmentation technique provides good and realistic clinical and functional results during the early post-operative period with high levels of satisfaction of patients, including participation in sports and physical activity, and high rates of return to sports at the preinjury level, without any apparent complications compared with hamstring ACL reconstruction alone. No increases in complication, reinjury rates, or increased lateral laxity were observed at the 12-month or 24-month follow-up.

Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autologous hamstrings with LARS augmentation demonstrates comparable outcomes to hamstrings alone, without evidence of synovitis or early osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with, or without, LARS augmentation.

METHODS

One-hundred and thirty-six patients that underwent double-bundle ACLR with (DB Hams/LARS, n = 67), or without (DB Hams, n = 69), LARS augmentation, were assessed clinically and with Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) at a minimum of 7-years post-surgery. Patients were assessed via patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), KT-1000 (laxity), isokinetic knee extensor and flexor strength and a 4-hop test battery. Limb symmetry indices (LSIs) were calculated. The Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (WORMS) evaluated knee status via MRI. Sport participation, secondary operations, ACL re-tears and contralateral ACL tears were reported.

RESULTS

No differences (n.s.) were observed in demographics, PROMs, KT-1000 scores or strength and hop LSIs. Normal (< 3 mm side-to-side differences) KT-1000 scores were observed in 64 (92.8%) and 59 (88.1%) of DB Hams and DB Hams/LARS patients, respectively. Comparative rates of satisfaction were reported. Knee flexor strength and hop test LSIs were all ˃95% in both groups, which was 94.2% and 96.7% for knee extensor strength in the DB Hams and DB Hams/LARS cohorts, respectively. While 53 (76.8%) and 52 (77.6%) of the DB Hams and DB Hams/LARS patients had returned to pivoting sports, 42 (60.9%) and 41 (61.2%) were participating in pivoting sports at the minimum 7-year review. No difference (n.s.) was observed in the WORMS (12.3 DB Hams, 16.7 DB Hams/LARS). Of the cohort assessed, 8 (11%) DB Hams and 11 (16%) DB Hams/LARS patients had undergone secondary surgery. In addition to one patient in each group that demonstrated ACL rupture on MRI, an additional cohort of patients were excluded from the current analysis due to prior re-tear (DB Hams n = 6, DB Hams/LARS n = 8) or contralateral ACL tear (DB Hams n = 4, DB Hams/LARS n = 4).

CONCLUSIONS

Comparable outcomes were observed after double-bundle ACLR using autologous hamstrings with, or without, LARS augmentation. Therefore, while these outcomes do not justify the additional use of synthetic augmentation given the lack of further benefit and additional cost, higher rates of graft failure, synovitis and early osteoarthritic change previously reported were not observed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.