Marco Cuzzolin1, Davide Previtali1, Stefano Zaffagnini2, Luca Deabate1, Christian Candrian1,3, Giuseppe Filardo1,3,4. 1. Orthopaedic and Traumatology Unit, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano Service of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Department of Surgery, EOC, Lugano, Switzerland. 2. Clinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica II, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy. 3. Facoltà di Scienze Biomediche, Università della Svizzera Italiana (USI), Lugano, Switzerland. 4. Applied and Translational Research Center, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The impact of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction on knee osteoarthritis (OA) is still unclear. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to compare surgical treatment versus nonoperative management of ACL tears to assess the impact of these approaches on knee OA development at a 5 and 10 years of follow-up. DESIGN: A meta-analysis was performed after a systematic literature search (May 2021) was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Both randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies with more than 5 years of follow-up were selected. Influence of the treatment was assessed in terms of knee OA development, subjective and objective clinical results, activity level, and risk of further surgeries. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed following the Cochrane guidelines. RESULTS: Twelve studies matched the inclusion criteria, for a total of 1,004 patients. Level of evidence was rated low to very low. No difference was documented in terms of knee OA development, Tegner score, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Lysholm scores. A significant difference favoring the surgical treatment in comparison with a nonsurgical approach was observed in terms of objective IKDC score (P = 0.03) and risk of secondary meniscectomy (P < 0.0001). The level of evidence was considered very low for subjective IKDC, low for knee OA development, objective IKDC, number of secondary meniscectomies, and Lysholm score, and moderate for post-op Tegner score. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis did not support an advantage of ACL reconstruction in terms of OA prevention in comparison with a nonoperative treatment. Moreover, no differences were reported for subjective results and activity level at 5 and 10 years of follow-up. On the contrary, patients who underwent surgical treatment of their ACL tear presented important clinical findings in terms of better objective knee function and a lower rate of secondary meniscectomies when compared with conservatively managed patents.Protocol Registration: CRD420191156483 (PROSPERO).
OBJECTIVES: The impact of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction on knee osteoarthritis (OA) is still unclear. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to compare surgical treatment versus nonoperative management of ACL tears to assess the impact of these approaches on knee OA development at a 5 and 10 years of follow-up. DESIGN: A meta-analysis was performed after a systematic literature search (May 2021) was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Both randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies with more than 5 years of follow-up were selected. Influence of the treatment was assessed in terms of knee OA development, subjective and objective clinical results, activity level, and risk of further surgeries. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed following the Cochrane guidelines. RESULTS: Twelve studies matched the inclusion criteria, for a total of 1,004 patients. Level of evidence was rated low to very low. No difference was documented in terms of knee OA development, Tegner score, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Lysholm scores. A significant difference favoring the surgical treatment in comparison with a nonsurgical approach was observed in terms of objective IKDC score (P = 0.03) and risk of secondary meniscectomy (P < 0.0001). The level of evidence was considered very low for subjective IKDC, low for knee OA development, objective IKDC, number of secondary meniscectomies, and Lysholm score, and moderate for post-op Tegner score. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis did not support an advantage of ACL reconstruction in terms of OA prevention in comparison with a nonoperative treatment. Moreover, no differences were reported for subjective results and activity level at 5 and 10 years of follow-up. On the contrary, patients who underwent surgical treatment of their ACL tear presented important clinical findings in terms of better objective knee function and a lower rate of secondary meniscectomies when compared with conservatively managed patents.Protocol Registration: CRD420191156483 (PROSPERO).
Authors: Alexander A Theologis; Daniel Kuo; Jonathan Cheng; Radu I Bolbos; Julio Carballido-Gamio; C Benjamin Ma; Xiaojuan Li Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2010-10-29 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Belle L van Meer; Duncan E Meuffels; Wilbert A van Eijsden; Jan A N Verhaar; Sita M A Bierma-Zeinstra; Max Reijman Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2015-03-30 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Kyle P Harris; Jeffrey B Driban; Michael R Sitler; Nicole M Cattano; Easwaran Balasubramanian; Jennifer M Hootman Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2015-06-26 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Nathan A Mall; Peter N Chalmers; Mario Moric; Miho J Tanaka; Brian J Cole; Bernard R Bach; George A Paletta Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2014-08-01 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Charles L Cox; Laura J Huston; Warren R Dunn; Emily K Reinke; Samuel K Nwosu; Richard D Parker; Rick W Wright; Christopher C Kaeding; Robert G Marx; Annunziata Amendola; Eric C McCarty; Kurt P Spindler Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2014-03-19 Impact factor: 6.202