Vascular lesions associated with bicruciate and knee dislocation ligamentous injury.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of associated vascular lesions in biligamentous cruciate injuries of the knee ranges from 16 to 64%, with a mean rate of 30%. Treatment of ischemic vascular lesions associated with ligaments injury is well established, comprising emergency arterial vascular repair, most of the times combined to external fixation. In the absence of clinical symptoms of vascular lesion, some authors recommend systematically performing arteriography, while others advocate selectively prescribing this examination in doubtful clinical situations. The present study analyzed data extracted from the prospective series of the 2008 SOFCOT Symposium (dedicated to management of bicruciate knee lesions) and from an analysis of the literature, with emphasis on developing a diagnostic strategy for vascular lesions associated with bicruciate lesions.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: This multicenter prospective study included all patients treated in the reference centers for dislocation or bicruciate lesion of the knee between January 2007 and January 2008. All patients underwent early objective vascular imaging.
RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were included. Mean dislocation reduction time was 2 hrs 45 min (max, 21 hrs). There were nine vascular lesions (12%). Absence of vascular lesion could be confirmed in 58 of the 59 patients exhibiting presence of peripheral pulses at initial examination. In one case, a vascular lesion was found on early imaging, but with no clinical consequence. In all eight cases with associated clinical pulse abnormality, complementary vascular check-up confirmed the presence of a vascular lesion. Angioscan induced no error of vascular assessment in this series, with no false positives or false negatives. One patient underwent amputation for critical ischemia. Three patients had vascular surgical treatment, two not undergoing secondary ligament surgery. Four of the five patients whose vascular lesion was conservatively managed by simple observation were able to undergo the scheduled treatment for their ligament lesions. DISCUSSION: At initial examination, it is essential to look for the peripheral pulse. In case of ischemic syndrome, the priority is a revascularization procedure associated to intraoperative arteriography. In case of abnormal pulse without obvious ischemia, emergency imaging (usually arteriogram or angioscan) is essential. Where there is no initial clinical vascular abnormality, good practice is less clearly cut. Initially, present pulses are found in a mean 30% (17-55%) of cases of popliteal artery lesion, according to the series. Different authors draw diverging conclusions from this fact. For some, the absence of frank abnormality on clinical examination is sufficient to exclude not any possible anatomic vascular lesion but any vascular lesion requiring surgery. However, even without pulse abnormality, we consider systematic imaging to be justified, partly by the difficulty of ensuring strict monitoring, and partly by the decompensation risk of clinically asymptomatic intimal lesions during the ligament surgery under consideration in most cases. Although many authors cling to the dogma of late emergency arteriography, recent reports argue against this attitude. Angio-MRI has good diagnostic value, but in practice is difficult to obtain in emergency. We would rather advocate angioscanning, which is easily available in emergency and does not incur the risk of local complication associated with arteriography.