Alberto Grassi1, Juan Pablo Zicaro2, Matias Costa-Paz2, Kristian Samuelsson3, Adrian Wilson4, Stefano Zaffagnini5,6, Vincenzo Condello7. 1. IIa Clinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1/10, 40136, Bologna, Italy. alberto.grassi3@studio.unibo.it. 2. Department of Knee Arthroscopy, Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina. 3. Department of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Basingstoke and North Hampshire Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust, Aldermaston Road, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG24 9NA, UK. 5. IIa Clinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1/10, 40136, Bologna, Italy. 6. Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche e Neuromotorie DIBINEM, Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy. 7. Joint Preservation and Reconstructive Surgery and Sports Medicine Unit, Humanitas Castelli Clinic, Bergamo, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Residual rotational instability remains a controversial factor when analysing failure rates of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Anatomical and biomechanical studies have demonstrated a very important role of anterolateral structures for rotational control. Revision ACL is considered one of the main indications for a lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET). Yet, few series evaluating these procedures are published. PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review of studies that assessed outcomes in patients treated with revision ACL surgery associated with a lateral extra-articular procedure. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in February 2018 using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Search and Cochrane. Inclusion criteria were series of ACL revision reconstructions associated with lateral extra-articular procedures. Clinical outcomes (Lysholm, subjective IKDC, KOOS, Cincinnati and WOMAC), joint stability measures (Lachman test, pivot-shift, arthrometer assessment and navigation assessment), graft type, reported chondral and meniscal injury, radiographic outcomes, complications and failures were recorded. Articles were assessed for level of evidence and methodology using a modification of the ACL Methodology Score (AMS) system. RESULTS: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria out of the 231 abstracts; 9 retrospective evaluations, two prospective cohorts and one combination of two populations (a retrospective and prospective series). A total of 851 patients evaluated with a mean age of 28.8 years (range 16-68 years) and a weighted mean follow-up of 4.9 years (range 1-10 years). The mean time from primary ACL reconstruction to revision was 5.3 years (reported in 7 studies, including 710 patients). The Lysholm, IKDC, and KOOS scores indicated favorable results in studies that reported these outcomes. Objective evaluations reported 86% objective A and B IKDC results, 2.6 mm mean side-to-side arthrometric difference and 80% negative pivot-shift. About 74% of patients returned to their previous sport (evaluated in six studies). Few studies reported radiological evaluation. Fifty-nine complications (8.0%) and 24 failures (3.6%) were reported. The mean modified ACL Methodology Score was 55.5 (range 32-72). CONCLUSION: Good mid-term results were obtained for combined revision ACL reconstruction and lateral extra-articular procedures. Despite the fact that in clinical practice LET are a common indication associated with revision ACL, there are no high-level studies supporting this technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
BACKGROUND: Residual rotational instability remains a controversial factor when analysing failure rates of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Anatomical and biomechanical studies have demonstrated a very important role of anterolateral structures for rotational control. Revision ACL is considered one of the main indications for a lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET). Yet, few series evaluating these procedures are published. PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review of studies that assessed outcomes in patients treated with revision ACL surgery associated with a lateral extra-articular procedure. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in February 2018 using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Search and Cochrane. Inclusion criteria were series of ACL revision reconstructions associated with lateral extra-articular procedures. Clinical outcomes (Lysholm, subjective IKDC, KOOS, Cincinnati and WOMAC), joint stability measures (Lachman test, pivot-shift, arthrometer assessment and navigation assessment), graft type, reported chondral and meniscal injury, radiographic outcomes, complications and failures were recorded. Articles were assessed for level of evidence and methodology using a modification of the ACL Methodology Score (AMS) system. RESULTS: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria out of the 231 abstracts; 9 retrospective evaluations, two prospective cohorts and one combination of two populations (a retrospective and prospective series). A total of 851 patients evaluated with a mean age of 28.8 years (range 16-68 years) and a weighted mean follow-up of 4.9 years (range 1-10 years). The mean time from primary ACL reconstruction to revision was 5.3 years (reported in 7 studies, including 710 patients). The Lysholm, IKDC, and KOOS scores indicated favorable results in studies that reported these outcomes. Objective evaluations reported 86% objective A and B IKDC results, 2.6 mm mean side-to-side arthrometric difference and 80% negative pivot-shift. About 74% of patients returned to their previous sport (evaluated in six studies). Few studies reported radiological evaluation. Fifty-nine complications (8.0%) and 24 failures (3.6%) were reported. The mean modified ACL Methodology Score was 55.5 (range 32-72). CONCLUSION: Good mid-term results were obtained for combined revision ACL reconstruction and lateral extra-articular procedures. Despite the fact that in clinical practice LET are a common indication associated with revision ACL, there are no high-level studies supporting this technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Authors: Volker Musahl; Alan Getgood; Philippe Neyret; Steven Claes; Jeremy M Burnham; Cecile Batailler; Bertrand Sonnery-Cottet; Andy Williams; Andrew Amis; Stefano Zaffagnini; Jón Karlsson Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2017-03-12 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Alberto Grassi; Clare L Ardern; Giulio Maria Marcheggiani Muccioli; Maria Pia Neri; Maurilio Marcacci; Stefano Zaffagnini Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2016-01-25 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Jeremy M Burnham; Elmar Herbst; Thierry Pauyo; Thomas Pfeiffer; Darren L Johnson; Freddie H Fu; Volker Musahl Journal: Oper Tech Orthop Date: 2017-02-01
Authors: Lena Eggeling; T C Drenck; J Frings; M Krause; Alexander Korthaus; Anna Krukenberg; Karl-Heinz Frosch; Ralph Akoto Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2021-08-29 Impact factor: 3.067
Authors: I Gusti Ngurah Wien Aryana; I Wayan Subawa; I Wayan Suryanto Dusak; Cokorda Gde Oka Dharmayuda; Hans Kristian Nugraha; Maria Florencia Deslivia Journal: Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) Date: 2022-01-21