Literature DB >> 31653779

Does early anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction prevent development of meniscal damage? Results from a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

Barbara A Snoeker1, Frank W Roemer2,3, Aleksandra Turkiewicz4, Stefan Lohmander5, Richard B Frobell5, Martin Englund4,6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine development of new and worsening meniscal damage over 5 years after acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury comparing rehabilitation plus early ACL reconstruction ('early-ACLR') versus rehabilitation with optional delayed ACL reconstruction ('optional-delayed-ACLR').
METHODS: We used knee MRIs from the only randomised controlled trial in the field including 121 young adults. One musculoskeletal radiologist read baseline and 5-year follow-up images using the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Osteoarthritis Score (ACLOAS). We defined development (ie, new and worsening) of meniscal damage both dichotomously and as a sum score representing severity (based on the reclassified ACLOAS meniscus grades). In the full analysis set, we analysed development of meniscal damage (yes/no) with logistic regression and severity with zero-inflated Poisson regression and adjusted for age, sex and baseline meniscal damage.
RESULTS: Over 5 years, new or worsening meniscal damage developed in 45% of subjects with early-ACLR and in 53% of subjects with optional-delayed-ACLR. The relative risk for development of meniscal damage on knee level was 1.3 (95% CI 0.9 to 1.9) in optional-delayed-ACLR versus early-ACLR. For medial and lateral meniscal damage, respectively, the relative risks were 2.1 (95% CI 1.1 to 3.9) and 1.0 (95% CI 0.6 to 1.5). The mean severity score was 1.5 higher (more severe damage) on knee level in optional-delayed-ACLR versus early-ACLR (95% CI 1.1 to 1.9) among those with meniscal damage at 5 years. For medial and lateral meniscal damage, respectively, the corresponding scores were 1.7 (95% CI 1.2 to 2.5) and 1.1 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.4).
CONCLUSION: A strategy of early-ACLR may reduce development of medial meniscal damage following acute ACL injury. For the lateral meniscus, ACLR seems neither to be protective nor to increase the risk of damage. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN 84752559. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ACL; knee; knee surgery; meniscus; randomised controlled trial

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31653779     DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2019-101125

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Sports Med        ISSN: 0306-3674            Impact factor:   13.800


  4 in total

Review 1.  Does Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Protect the Meniscus and Its Repair? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Jasmijn V Korpershoek; Tommy S de Windt; Lucienne A Vonk; Aaron J Krych; Daniel B F Saris
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2020-07-28

Review 2.  Second-Look Arthroscopic Evaluation of Healing Rates After Arthroscopic Repair of Meniscal Tears: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Wenli Dai; Xi Leng; Jian Wang; Xiaoqing Hu; Yingfang Ao
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2021-10-22

3.  Greater proportion of patients report an acceptable symptom state after ACL reconstruction compared with non-surgical treatment: a 10-year follow-up from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry.

Authors:  Kajsa Persson; Emma Bergerson; Eleonor Svantesson; Alexandra Horvath; Jon Karlsson; Volker Musahl; Kristian Samuelsson; Eric Hamrin Senorski
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 18.473

4.  Deep Learning-Based Magnetic Resonance Imaging Image Features for Diagnosis of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury.

Authors:  Zijian Li; Shiyou Ren; Ri Zhou; Xiaocheng Jiang; Tian You; Canfeng Li; Wentao Zhang
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2021-07-02       Impact factor: 2.682

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.