PURPOSE: Partial anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears involving the posterolateral (PL) bundle can lead to rotatory laxity of the knee, while tears involving the anteromedial (AM) bundle result in abnormal anteroposterior laxity of the knee. In this systematic review, we examine the best evidence on the management of partial tears of the ACL. METHODS: A comprehensive search of several databases was performed from the inception of the database to December 2011, using various combinations of keywords focusing on clinical outcomes of human patients who had partial tears of ACL and who had undergone ACL augmentation. We evaluated the methodological quality of each article using the Coleman Methodology Score. RESULTS: Ten articles published in peer-reviewed journals were identified (392 males and 242 females), with a mean modified Coleman methodology of 66.1 ± 10.2. Only two studies compared standard ACL reconstruction and augmentation techniques. No study has a sample large enough to allow establishing guidelines. Validated and standardized proprioception assessment methods should be used to report outcomes. Imaging outcomes should be compared to functional outcomes, and a control group consisting of traditional complete ACL reconstruction should be present. CONCLUSION: There is a need to perform appropriately powered randomized controlled trials presenting clinical outcome with homogeneous score systems to allow accurate statistical analysis. ACL augmentation technique, preserving the intact AM or PL bundle of the ACL, is encouraging but currently available evidences are too weak to support his routine use in clinical practice.
PURPOSE: Partial anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears involving the posterolateral (PL) bundle can lead to rotatory laxity of the knee, while tears involving the anteromedial (AM) bundle result in abnormal anteroposterior laxity of the knee. In this systematic review, we examine the best evidence on the management of partial tears of the ACL. METHODS: A comprehensive search of several databases was performed from the inception of the database to December 2011, using various combinations of keywords focusing on clinical outcomes of humanpatients who had partial tears of ACL and who had undergone ACL augmentation. We evaluated the methodological quality of each article using the Coleman Methodology Score. RESULTS: Ten articles published in peer-reviewed journals were identified (392 males and 242 females), with a mean modified Coleman methodology of 66.1 ± 10.2. Only two studies compared standard ACL reconstruction and augmentation techniques. No study has a sample large enough to allow establishing guidelines. Validated and standardized proprioception assessment methods should be used to report outcomes. Imaging outcomes should be compared to functional outcomes, and a control group consisting of traditional complete ACL reconstruction should be present. CONCLUSION: There is a need to perform appropriately powered randomized controlled trials presenting clinical outcome with homogeneous score systems to allow accurate statistical analysis. ACL augmentation technique, preserving the intact AM or PL bundle of the ACL, is encouraging but currently available evidences are too weak to support his routine use in clinical practice.
Authors: Daniel S Lamar; Arthur R Bartolozzi; Kevin B Freedman; Sameer H Nagda; Clifford Fawcett Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: A D Georgoulis; L Pappa; U Moebius; V Malamou-Mitsi; S Pappa; C O Papageorgiou; N J Agnantis; P N Soucacos Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2001-09-07 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Bertrand Sonnery-Cottet; F Lavoie; R Ogassawara; R G Scussiato; J F Kidder; P Chambat Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2009-07-08 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Stephan Lorenz; Philipp Ahrens; Sonja Kirchhoff; Petra Wolf; Stefan Hinterwimmer; Andreas Obermeier; Marc Beirer; Chlodwig Kirchhoff Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2014-10-08 Impact factor: 3.075