PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the functional and clinical results of patients who underwent ACL reconstruction surgery and were divided into subpopulations related to ACL-associated lesions and focused on ALL-associated lesion. METHODS: Our retrospective analysis included 62 patients who underwent standard ACL reconstruction surgery in our hospital from 2014 to 2016. The mean follow-up period was 21 months (range 11-35). We divided the sample into two subpopulations due to the presence or absence of ALL tear at the preoperative MRI. In 42 patients out of 62 (68%), ALL lesion was evident. We evaluated in both subpopulations the ACL failure rate, the functional outcomes rated with IKDC, KOOS, Lysholm scores and the clinical assessment of anteroposterior and rotatory instability with the Lachman test and pivot-shift test. RESULTS: The overall re-injury rate in our cohort of patients was 4.8% with a smaller but not a significant difference between the two groups. A statistically significant difference was observed for the three functional scores, favoring the isolated ACL-lesion group (p < 0.05). Similarly, a better Lachman score was observed in the isolated ACL-lesion group, without statistical significance (p = 0.77); overall, the rate of positive test was lower in the isolated ACL-lesion group. We observed a significant difference of residual rotatory instability (positive pivot-shift test) in the two subpopulations (p = 0.036), and 9% of patients in the ACL + ALL lesion group showed residual jerk or subluxation. CONCLUSION: The additional ALL reconstruction/repair surgery should always be considered in patients with evident ALL tear at the preoperative MRI.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the functional and clinical results of patients who underwent ACL reconstruction surgery and were divided into subpopulations related to ACL-associated lesions and focused on ALL-associated lesion. METHODS: Our retrospective analysis included 62 patients who underwent standard ACL reconstruction surgery in our hospital from 2014 to 2016. The mean follow-up period was 21 months (range 11-35). We divided the sample into two subpopulations due to the presence or absence of ALL tear at the preoperative MRI. In 42 patients out of 62 (68%), ALL lesion was evident. We evaluated in both subpopulations the ACL failure rate, the functional outcomes rated with IKDC, KOOS, Lysholm scores and the clinical assessment of anteroposterior and rotatory instability with the Lachman test and pivot-shift test. RESULTS: The overall re-injury rate in our cohort of patients was 4.8% with a smaller but not a significant difference between the two groups. A statistically significant difference was observed for the three functional scores, favoring the isolated ACL-lesion group (p < 0.05). Similarly, a better Lachman score was observed in the isolated ACL-lesion group, without statistical significance (p = 0.77); overall, the rate of positive test was lower in the isolated ACL-lesion group. We observed a significant difference of residual rotatory instability (positive pivot-shift test) in the two subpopulations (p = 0.036), and 9% of patients in the ACL + ALL lesion group showed residual jerk or subluxation. CONCLUSION: The additional ALL reconstruction/repair surgery should always be considered in patients with evident ALL tear at the preoperative MRI.
Authors: Mininder S Kocher; J Richard Steadman; Karen K Briggs; William I Sterett; Richard J Hawkins Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2004 Apr-May Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Guy Bellier; Pascal Christel; Philippe Colombet; Patrick Djian; Jean Pierre Franceschi; Abdou Sbihi Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Asep Santoso; Iwan Budiwan Anwar; Tangkas Sibarani; Bintang Soetjahjo; Dwikora Novembri Utomo; Edi Mustamsir; Nicolaas C Budhiparama Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2020-12-29