| Literature DB >> 33855095 |
Neel K Patel1, Jayson Lian1,2, Michael Nickoli1, Ravi Vaswani1, James J Irrgang1,3, Bryson P Lesniak1, Volker Musahl1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many factors can affect clinical outcomes and complications after a complex multiligament knee injury (MLKI). Certain aspects of the treatment algorithm for MLKI, such as the timing of surgery, remain controversial.Entities:
Keywords: knee dislocation; multiligament knee injury; multiligament knee reconstruction; risk factors
Year: 2021 PMID: 33855095 PMCID: PMC8010819 DOI: 10.1177/2325967121994203
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Orthop J Sports Med ISSN: 2325-9671
Baseline Characteristics of the Study Patients (N = 108)
| Age, y | 29.3 ± 11.9 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 30.3 ± 7.9 |
| Male sex | 80 (74) |
| Smoker | 27 (25) |
| Hypertension | 12 (11) |
| Diabetes | 4 (4) |
| Injury mechanism | |
|
| 43 (40) |
|
| 54 (50) |
|
| 7 (7) |
|
| 4 (4) |
| Injury pattern | |
|
| 56 (52) |
|
| 2 (2) |
|
| 46 (43) |
|
| 22 (20) |
|
| 24 (23) |
|
| 3 (3) |
|
| 1 (1) |
| Planned staged ligament repair | 24 (22) |
| Completed both repair stages | 17 (16) |
| Cartilage injury grade ≥2 | 35 (32) |
| Meniscal injury | 56 (52) |
| Time from injury to first surgery, days | 104.0 ± 189.2 |
| Passive ROM, deg | |
|
| 15 (14) |
|
| 8 (7) |
|
| 85 (79) |
Data are reported as n (%) or mean ± SD. ACL, anterior cruciate ligament; BMI, body mass index; KD, knee dislocation; LCL, lateral collateral ligament; MCL, medial collateral ligament; PCL, posterior cruciate ligament; ROM, range of motion; ULV, ultra-low energy.
According to Schenck classification[27]: KD I = involvement of the ACL or PCL; KD II = injury to both ACL and PCL, with both collaterals intact; KD III = injury to both ACL and PCL, also MCL or LCL torn; KD IIIM = MCL torn, KD IIIL = LCL torn; KD IV: all 4 ligaments torn.
Breakdown of Staged Surgeries and Complications by Injury Pattern
| Injury Pattern | No. of Patients | Complications | Staged Procedures |
|---|---|---|---|
| KD I | 56 | 10 arthrofibrosis, 2 wound infections, 2 revision ligament surgeries, 3 ROH | 7 (5 completed) |
| KD II | 2 | None | 0 |
| KD IIIM | 22 | 4 arthrofibrosis, 2 wound infections, 3 revision ligament surgeries, 1 ROH | 7 (6 completed) |
| KD IIIL | 24 | 3 arthrofibrosis, 3 wound infections, 1 revision ligament surgery, 1 ROH, 2 DVT | 9 (5 completed) |
| KD IV | 3 | None | 0 |
DVT, deep venous thrombosis; KD, knee dislocation; ROH, removal of hardware.
According to Schenck classification.[27]
Patient Characteristics According to Patients With and Without Complications
| Any Complication (n = 32) | No Complication (n = 76) |
| OR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y | 27.1 ± 11.2 | 30.2 ± 12.3 | .22 | 0.98 (0.94-1.01) |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 28.8 ± 7.4 | 31.0 ± 8.15 | .2 | 0.96 (0.91-1.02) |
| Male sex | 21 (66) | 59 (78) | .2 | 1.82 (0.73-4.5) |
| Smoker | 13 (42) | 14 (18) |
|
|
| Hypertension | 1 (3) | 11 (14) | .13 | 0.20 (0.02-1.60) |
| Diabetes (n = 107) | 2 (6) | 2 (3) | .36 | 2.55 (0.34-19.98) |
| Injury mechanism (n = 107) | ||||
| Sports (set as indicator) | 13 (41) | 30 (40) | ||
| Trauma | 16 (50) | 37 (49) | .99 | 1.00 (0.42-2.40) |
| ULV | 3 (9) | 4 (5) | .51 | 1.73 (0.34-8.85) |
| Other | 0 (0) | 4 (5) | .99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| Injury pattern | ||||
| KD I (set as indicator) | 12 (38) | 44 (57) | ||
| KD II | 0 (0) | 2 (3) | >.99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| KD IIIL | 9 (28) | 15 (18) | .19 | 1.99 (0.71-5.58) |
| KD IIIM | 10 (31) | 13 (17) | .08 | 2.54 (0.91-7.14) |
| KD IV | 1 (3) | 2 (3) | >.99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| Other | 0 (0) | 1 (1) | >.99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| Planned staged ligament repair (n = 106) | 11 (34) | 12 (16) |
|
|
| Completed both repair stages (n = 23) | 6 (55) | 10 (83) | .15 | 0.24 (0.035-1.649) |
| Cartilage injury grade ≥2 (n = 84) | 8 (31) | 19 (33) | .86 | 0.912 (0.337-2.473) |
| Meniscal injury (n = 96) | 12 (43) | 38 (56) | .25 | 0.59 (0.24-1.44) |
| Time from injury to first surgery, days | 48.1 ± 49.5 | 128.1 ± 22.2 |
|
|
| Passive ROM, deg | ||||
| <90 | 5 (24) | 5 (10) | .12 | 3.00 (0.75-11.92) |
| 90-110 | 2 (10) | 3 (6) | .47 | 2.00 (0.30-13.22) |
| >110 (set as indicator) | 15 (67) | 42 (84) |
Data are reported as n (%) or mean ± SD unless otherwise indicated. Sample size = 108 patients unless otherwise indicated. Bolded values indicate statistically significant difference between groups. BMI, body mass index; KD, knee dislocation; OR, odds ratio; ROM, range of motion; ULV, ultra-low energy.
According to Schenck classification.[27]
Patient Characteristics According to Patients With and Without Arthrofibrosis
| Arthrofibrosis Requiring MUA (n = 18) | No Arthrofibrosis Requiring MUA (n = 89) |
| OR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y (n = 107) | 24.4 ± 9.28 | 30.1 ± 12.3 | .08 | 0.95 (0.90-1.01) |
| BMI, kg/m2 (n = 107) | 27.2 ± 4.0 | 31.0 ± 8.5 | .07 | 0.92 (0.85-1.01) |
| Male sex (n = 107) | 15 (83) | 64 (72) | .32 | 0.51 (0.14-1.92) |
| Smoker (n = 106) | 5 (29) | 22 (25) | .69 | 1.27 (0.40-4.00) |
| Hypertension (n = 106) | 0 (0) | 12 (13) | >.99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| Diabetes (n = 106) | 0 (0) | 4 (4) | >.99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| Injury mechanism (n = 106) | ||||
| Sports (set as indicator) | 9 (50) | 33 (34) | ||
| Trauma | 9 (50) | 44 (50) | .58 | 0.75 (0.27-2.10) |
| ULV | 0 (0) | 7 (8) | .99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| Other | 0 (0) | 4 (5) | .99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| Injury pattern | ||||
| KD I (set as indicator) | 9 (50) | 47 (53) | ||
| KD II | 0 (0) | 2 (2) | .99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| KD IIIL | 4 (22) | 19 (21) | .96 | 0.97 (0.27-3.47) |
| KD IIIM | 4 (22) | 19 (21) | .96 | 0.97 (0.27-3.47) |
| KD IV | 1 (6) | 2 (2) | .99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| Other | 0 (0) | 1 (1) | >.99 | 0.00 (0.00-no upper) |
| Planned staged ligament repair (n = 105) | 6 (33) | 17 (20) | .2 | 2.06 (0.68-6.27) |
| Completed both repair stages (n = 23) | 2 (33) | 14 (82) |
|
|
| Cartilage injury grade ≥2 (n = 83) | 4 (29) | 23 (33) | .73 | 0.80 (0.23-2.83) |
| Meniscal injury (n = 95) | 7 (44) | 43 (54) | .44 | 0.65 (0.22-1.92) |
| Time from injury to first surgery, days (n = 105) | 37.4 ± 42.3 | 117.8 ± 205.4 |
|
|
| Passive ROM, deg (n = 70) | ||||
| <90 | 2 (15) | 8 (14) | .78 | 1.28 (0.232-7.04) |
| 90-110 | 2 (15) | 3 (5) | .21 | 3.41 (0.50-23.40) |
| >110 (set as indicator) | 9 (69) | 46 (81) |
Data are reported as mean ± SD or n (%) unless otherwise indicated. Sample size = 108 patients unless otherwise indicated. Bolded values indicate statistically significant difference between groups. BMI, body mass index; KD, knee dislocation; MUA, manipulation under anesthesia; OR, odds ratio; ROM, range of motion; ULV, ultra-low energy.
According to Schenck classification.[27]