Literature DB >> 25274353

Effect of graft choice on the outcome of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) Cohort.

.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most surgeons believe that graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is an important factor related to outcome; however, graft choice for revision may be limited due to previously used grafts. HYPOTHESES: Autograft use would result in increased sports function, increased activity level, and decreased osteoarthritis symptoms (as measured by validated patient-reported outcome instruments). Autograft use would result in decreased graft failure and reoperation rate 2 years after revision ACL reconstruction. STUDY
DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.
METHODS: Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction were identified and prospectively enrolled by 83 surgeons at 52 sites. Data collected included baseline demographics, surgical technique, pathologic abnormalities, and the results of a series of validated, patient-reported outcome instruments (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC], and Marx activity rating score). Patients were followed up at 2 years and asked to complete the identical set of outcome instruments. Incidences of additional surgery and reoperation due to graft failure were also recorded. Multivariate regression models were used to determine the predictors (risk factors) of IKDC, KOOS, WOMAC, Marx scores, graft rerupture, and reoperation rate at 2 years after revision surgery.
RESULTS: A total of 1205 patients (697 [58%] males) were enrolled. The median age was 26 years. In 88% of patients, this was their first revision, and 341 patients (28%) were undergoing revision by the surgeon who had performed the previous reconstruction. The median time since last ACL reconstruction was 3.4 years. Revision using an autograft was performed in 583 patients (48%), allograft was used in 590 (49%), and both types were used in 32 (3%). Questionnaire follow-up was obtained for 989 subjects (82%), while telephone follow-up was obtained for 1112 (92%). The IKDC, KOOS, and WOMAC scores (with the exception of the WOMAC stiffness subscale) all significantly improved at 2-year follow-up (P < .001). In contrast, the 2-year Marx activity score demonstrated a significant decrease from the initial score at enrollment (P < .001). Graft choice proved to be a significant predictor of 2-year IKDC scores (P = .017). Specifically, the use of an autograft for revision reconstruction predicted improved score on the IKDC (P = .045; odds ratio [OR] = 1.31; 95% CI, 1.01-1.70). The use of an autograft predicted an improved score on the KOOS sports and recreation subscale (P = .037; OR = 1.33; 95% CI, 1.02-1.73). Use of an autograft also predicted improved scores on the KOOS quality of life subscale (P = .031; OR = 1.33; 95% CI, 1.03-1.73). For the KOOS symptoms and KOOS activities of daily living subscales, graft choice did not predict outcome score. Graft choice was a significant predictor of 2-year Marx activity level scores (P = .012). Graft rerupture was reported in 37 of 1112 patients (3.3%) by their 2-year follow-up: 24 allografts, 12 autografts, and 1 allograft and autograft. Use of an autograft for revision resulted in patients being 2.78 times less likely to sustain a subsequent graft rupture compared with allograft (P = .047; 95% CI, 1.01-7.69).
CONCLUSION: Improved sports function and patient-reported outcome measures are obtained when an autograft is used. Additionally, use of an autograft shows a decreased risk in graft rerupture at 2-year follow-up. No differences were noted in rerupture or patient-reported outcomes between soft tissue and bone-patellar tendon-bone grafts. Surgeon education regarding the findings of this study has the potential to improve the results of revision ACL reconstruction.
© 2014 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  ACL revision; anterior cruciate ligament; graft; outcomes

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25274353      PMCID: PMC4447184          DOI: 10.1177/0363546514549005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  24 in total

Review 1.  Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Ganesh V Kamath; John C Redfern; Patrick E Greis; Robert T Burks
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2010-08-13       Impact factor: 6.202

2.  Anterior cruciate ligament revision reconstruction: two-year results from the MOON cohort.

Authors:  Rick W Wright; Warren R Dunn; Annunziato Amendola; Jack T Andrish; David C Flanigan; Morgan Jones; Christopher C Kaeding; Robert G Marx; Matthew J Matava; Eric C McCarty; Richard D Parker; Armando Vidal; Michelle Wolcott; Brian R Wolf; Kurt P Spindler
Journal:  J Knee Surg       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.757

Review 3.  Knee injury outcomes measures.

Authors:  Rick W Wright
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.020

Review 4.  Does the graft source really matter in the outcome of patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? An evaluation of autograft versus allograft reconstruction results: a systematic review.

Authors:  Timothy E Foster; Brian L Wolfe; Scott Ryan; Lorenzo Silvestri; Elizabeth Krall Kaye
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 6.202

5.  Pain assessment in osteoarthritis: experience with the WOMAC osteoarthritis index.

Authors:  N Bellamy
Journal:  Semin Arthritis Rheum       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 5.532

6.  Development and evaluation of an activity rating scale for disorders of the knee.

Authors:  R G Marx; T J Stump; E C Jones; T L Wickiewicz; R F Warren
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.202

7.  The prognosis and predictors of sports function and activity at minimum 6 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a population cohort study.

Authors:  Kurt P Spindler; Laura J Huston; Rick W Wright; Christopher C Kaeding; Robert G Marx; Annunziato Amendola; Richard D Parker; Jack T Andrish; Emily K Reinke; Frank E Harrell; Warren R Dunn
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2010-11-17       Impact factor: 6.202

8.  Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)--development of a self-administered outcome measure.

Authors:  E M Roos; H P Roos; L S Lohmander; C Ekdahl; B D Beynnon
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.751

9.  Allograft Versus Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Predictors of Failure From a MOON Prospective Longitudinal Cohort.

Authors:  Christopher C Kaeding; Brian Aros; Angela Pedroza; Eric Pifel; Annunziato Amendola; Jack T Andrish; Warren R Dunn; Robert G Marx; Eric C McCarty; Richard D Parker; Rick W Wright; Kurt P Spindler
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.843

10.  Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) - validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement.

Authors:  Ewa M Roos; Sören Toksvig-Larsen
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2003-05-25       Impact factor: 3.186

View more
  61 in total

1.  Relationship Between Sports Participation After Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and 2-Year Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

Authors:  John P Bigouette; Erin C Owen; Brett Brick A Lantz; Rudolf G Hoellrich; Laura J Huston; Amanda K Haas; Christina R Allen; Allen F Anderson; Daniel E Cooper; Thomas M DeBerardino; Warren R Dunn; Barton Mann; Kurt P Spindler; Michael J Stuart; Rick W Wright; John P Albright; Annunziato Ned Amendola; Jack T Andrish; Christopher C Annunziata; Robert A Arciero; Bernard R Bach; Champ L Baker; Arthur R Bartolozzi; Keith M Baumgarten; Jeffery R Bechler; Jeffrey H Berg; Geoffrey A Bernas; Stephen F Brockmeier; Robert H Brophy; Charles A Bush-Joseph; J Brad Butler; John D Campbell; James L Carey; James E Carpenter; Brian J Cole; Jonathan M Cooper; Charles L Cox; R Alexander Creighton; Diane L Dahm; Tal S David; David C Flanigan; Robert W Frederick; Theodore J Ganley; Elizabeth A Garofoli; Charles J Gatt; Steven R Gecha; James Robert Giffin; Sharon L Hame; Jo A Hannafin; Christopher D Harner; Norman Lindsay Harris; Keith S Hechtman; Elliott B Hershman; Timothy M Hosea; David C Johnson; Timothy S Johnson; Morgan H Jones; Christopher C Kaeding; Ganesh V Kamath; Thomas E Klootwyk; Bruce A Levy; C Benjamin Ma; G Peter Maiers; Robert G Marx; Matthew J Matava; Gregory M Mathien; David R McAllister; Eric C McCarty; Robert G McCormack; Bruce S Miller; Carl W Nissen; Daniel F O'Neill; Brett D Owens; Richard D Parker; Mark L Purnell; Arun J Ramappa; Michael A Rauh; Arthur C Rettig; Jon K Sekiya; Kevin G Shea; Orrin H Sherman; James R Slauterbeck; Matthew V Smith; Jeffrey T Spang; Steven J Svoboda; Timothy N Taft; Joachim J Tenuta; Edwin M Tingstad; Armando F Vidal; Darius G Viskontas; Richard A White; James S Williams; Michelle L Wolcott; Brian R Wolf; James J York
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 6.202

2.  Physiologic Preoperative Knee Hyperextension Is a Predictor of Failure in an Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision Cohort: A Report From the MARS Group.

Authors:  Daniel E Cooper; Warren R Dunn; Laura J Huston; Amanda K Haas; Kurt P Spindler; Christina R Allen; Allen F Anderson; Thomas M DeBerardino; Brett Brick A Lantz; Barton Mann; Michael J Stuart; John P Albright; Annunziato Ned Amendola; Jack T Andrish; Christopher C Annunziata; Robert A Arciero; Bernard R Bach; Champ L Baker; Arthur R Bartolozzi; Keith M Baumgarten; Jeffery R Bechler; Jeffrey H Berg; Geoffrey A Bernas; Stephen F Brockmeier; Robert H Brophy; Charles A Bush-Joseph; J Brad Butler V; John D Campbell; James L Carey; James E Carpenter; Brian J Cole; Jonathan M Cooper; Charles L Cox; R Alexander Creighton; Diane L Dahm; Tal S David; David C Flanigan; Robert W Frederick; Theodore J Ganley; Elizabeth A Garofoli; Charles J Gatt; Steven R Gecha; James Robert Giffin; Sharon L Hame; Jo A Hannafin; Christopher D Harner; Norman Lindsay Harris; Keith S Hechtman; Elliott B Hershman; Rudolf G Hoellrich; Timothy M Hosea; David C Johnson; Timothy S Johnson; Morgan H Jones; Christopher C Kaeding; Ganesh V Kamath; Thomas E Klootwyk; Bruce A Levy; C Benjamin Ma; G Peter Maiers; Robert G Marx; Matthew J Matava; Gregory M Mathien; David R McAllister; Eric C McCarty; Robert G McCormack; Bruce S Miller; Carl W Nissen; Daniel F O'Neill; Brett D Owens; Richard D Parker; Mark L Purnell; Arun J Ramappa; Michael A Rauh; Arthur C Rettig; Jon K Sekiya; Kevin G Shea; Orrin H Sherman; James R Slauterbeck; Matthew V Smith; Jeffrey T Spang; Steven J Svoboda; Timothy N Taft; Joachim J Tenuta; Edwin M Tingstad; Armando F Vidal; Darius G Viskontas; Richard A White; James S Williams; Michelle L Wolcott; Brian R Wolf; James J York; Rick W Wright
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2018-06-08       Impact factor: 6.202

3.  Meniscal and Articular Cartilage Predictors of Clinical Outcome After Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2016-05-09       Impact factor: 6.202

4.  Smartphone Data Capture Efficiently Augments Dictation for Knee Arthroscopic Surgery.

Authors:  Joseph Featherall; Sameer R Oak; Gregory J Strnad; Lutul D Farrow; Morgan H Jones; Anthony A Miniaci; Richard D Parker; James T Rosneck; Paul M Saluan; Kurt P Spindler
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2019-07-22       Impact factor: 3.020

5.  Good mid-term outcomes and low rates of residual rotatory laxity, complications and failures after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL) and lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET).

Authors:  Alberto Grassi; Juan Pablo Zicaro; Matias Costa-Paz; Kristian Samuelsson; Adrian Wilson; Stefano Zaffagnini; Vincenzo Condello
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-07-19       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  One-stage revision ACL reconstruction after primary ACL double bundle reconstruction: is bone-patella tendon-bone autograft reliable?

Authors:  Tomohiro Tomihara; Yusuke Hashimoto; Masatoshi Taniuchi; Junsei Takigami; Changhun Han; Nagakazu Shimada
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Superior return to sports rate after patellar tendon autograft over patellar tendon allograft in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Michèle N J Keizer; Roy A G Hoogeslag; Jos J A M van Raay; Egbert Otten; Reinoud W Brouwer
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-06-17       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  The 8-Strand Hamstring Autograft in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Kunbo Park; Christopher M Brusalis; Theodore J Ganley
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2016-09-26

9.  Tibial slope correction combined with second revision ACL produces good knee stability and prevents graft rupture.

Authors:  David Dejour; Mo Saffarini; Guillaume Demey; Laurent Baverel
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-08-23       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 10.  To MOON and Back: Lessons Learned and Experience Gained Along the Way.

Authors:  José F Vega; Kurt P Spindler
Journal:  Clin Sports Med       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.182

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.