Literature DB >> 25325560

Patient predictors of early revision surgery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cohort study of 16,930 patients with 2-year follow-up.

Daniel Andernord1, Neel Desai2, Haukur Björnsson2, Mattias Ylander3, Jón Karlsson2, Kristian Samuelsson2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Revision surgery is one of the most important endpoints during follow-up after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.
PURPOSE: To investigate if commonly known patient factors can predict revision surgery after ACL reconstruction. STUDY
DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.
METHODS: This prospective cohort study was based on data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Register during the period of January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2013. Patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon or bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts were included. Follow-up started on the date of primary ACL reconstruction, and follow-up ended with ACL revision surgery, after 24 months of follow-up, or on December 31, 2013, whichever occurred first. The analyzed patient variables were activity at the time of injury, sex, age, height, weight, body mass index, smoking, and the use of smokeless tobacco. The primary study endpoint was revision surgery, defined as replacement of a primary ACL reconstruction. Relative risk (RR) and 95% CIs were calculated and adjusted for confounding factors using multivariate statistics.
RESULTS: A total of 16,930 patients were included (males, n=9767 [57.7%]; females, n=7163 [42.3%]). The 2-year revision rate was 1.82% (95% CI, 1.62%-2.02%). There was no significant difference between male and female revision rates (1.74% [95% CI, 1.48%-2.00%] vs 1.93% [95% CI, 1.61%-2.25%], P=.383). In both males and females there was a significantly increased risk of revision surgery associated with soccer playing and adolescence (age 13-19 years) (males: RR=1.58 [95% CI, 1.12-2.23], P=.009 and RR=2.67 [95% CI, 1.91-3.73], P<.001, respectively; females: RR=1.43 [1.01-2.04], P=.045 and RR=2.25 [95% CI, 1.57-3.24], P<.001, respectively). A combination of these predictors were associated with a further increased risk of revision surgery (males: RR=2.87 [95% CI, 1.79-4.60], P<.001; females: RR=2.59 [95% CI, 1.69-3.96], P<.001).
CONCLUSION: Soccer players and adolescents had an increased risk of revision surgery after ACL reconstruction, with a respective factor of 1.5 and 2.5. Individuals with a combination of these 2 predictors carried an almost 3-fold higher risk of revision surgery. There were no significant associations for sex, height, weight, body mass index, or tobacco use.
© 2014 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  age factors; anthropometry; autografts; body height; body mass index; body weight; bone–patellar tendon–bone; epidemiology; graft failure; graft survival; hamstring tendon; knee injury; registries; sex; smokeless tobacco; smoking; sports medicine; surgical revision

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25325560     DOI: 10.1177/0363546514552788

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


  63 in total

1.  Incidence and Predictors of Second Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury After Primary Reconstruction and Return to Sport.

Authors:  Mark V Paterno
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.860

2.  Factors influencing the success of anterior cruciate ligament repair with dynamic intraligamentary stabilisation.

Authors:  Anna M Krismer; Lampros Gousopoulos; Sandro Kohl; Atesch Ateschrang; Hendrik Kohlhof; Sufian S Ahmad
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Surgeon experience with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization does not influence risk of failure.

Authors:  Philipp Henle; Kathrin S Bieri; Janosch Haeberli; Nele Arnout; Jan Victor; Mirco Herbort; Clemens Koesters; Stefan Eggli
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 4.  Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: clinical outcome and evidence for return to sport.

Authors:  Luca Andriolo; Giuseppe Filardo; Elizaveta Kon; Margherita Ricci; Francesco Della Villa; Stefano Della Villa; Stefano Zaffagnini; Maurilio Marcacci
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-07-23       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Risk of Revision Was Not Reduced by a Double-bundle ACL Reconstruction Technique: Results From the Scandinavian Registers.

Authors:  Cathrine Aga; Jüri-Tomas Kartus; Martin Lind; Stein Håkon Låstad Lygre; Lars-Petter Granan; Lars Engebretsen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Anatomical features and significance of the anterolateral ligament of the knee.

Authors:  Evgeniy Nikolaevich Goncharov; Oleg Aleksandrovich Koval; Eduard Nikolaevich Bezuglov; Nikolay Gavriilovich Goncharov
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-07-03       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Enhanced Bone-Tendon-Bone Approach for Open Anterior Cruciate Ligament Replacement With Conservation of the Joint Capsule.

Authors:  Sebastian Gottfried Walter; Tom Sascha Thomas; Luca Tafuro; Wolfram Thomas
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2015-10-26

8.  Risk factors for knee instability after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Ji Hyun Ahn; Sung Hyun Lee
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-03-19       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Effect of High-Grade Preoperative Knee Laxity on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Outcomes.

Authors:  Robert A Magnussen; Emily K Reinke; Laura J Huston; Timothy E Hewett; Kurt P Spindler
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2016-08-01       Impact factor: 6.202

10.  A Novel Mass-Spring-Damper Model Analysis to Identify Landing Deficits in Athletes Returning to Sport After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Daniel K Schneider; Alli Gokeler; Egbert Otten; Kevin R Ford; Timothy E Hewett; Jon G Divine; Angelo J Colosimo; Robert S Heidt; Gregory D Myer
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.775

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.