Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are among the most common knee injuries sustained in elite sport, and athletes generally undergo ACL reconstruction (ACLR) to facilitate their return to sport. ACL graft rupture is a career-threatening event for elite athletes. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to determine the risk factors for graft failure in professional athletes undergoing ACLR. It was hypothesized that athletes who underwent combined ACLR with a lateral extra-articular procedure (LEAP) would experience significantly lower rates of graft rupture in comparison with those who underwent isolated ACLR. Study design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Professional athletes who underwent primary ACLR with a minimum follow-up of 2 years were identified from the Santy database. Patients were excluded if they underwent major concomitant procedures, including multiligament reconstruction surgery or osteotomy. Further ipsilateral knee injury, contralateral knee injury, and any other reoperations or complications after the index procedure were identified by interrogation of the database and review of the medical notes. Results: A total of 342 athletes with a mean follow-up of 100.2 ± 51.9 months (range, 24-215 months) were analyzed. Graft failures totaling 31 (9.1%) were reported, requiring revision surgery because of symptomatic instability. The rate of graft failure was significantly higher when ACLR was not combined with a LEAP (15.5% vs 6.0%; P = .0105) and in athletes aged 21 years or younger (13.8% vs 6.6%; P = .0290). A multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox model and demonstrated that athletes undergoing an isolated ACLR were at >2-fold risk of ACL graft rupture (hazard ratio [HR], 2.678 [1.173; 4.837], P = .0164) when compared with those undergoing a combined ACLR with a LEAP. Additionally, athletes aged ≤21 years were also at >2-fold risk of graft failure (HR, 2.381 [1.313; 5.463]; P = .0068) than those aged >21 years. Sex, sport, and graft type were not found to be significant risk factors for graft failure. Conclusion: Professional athletes undergoing isolated ACLR and aged ≤21 years are at >2-fold greater risk of graft failure. Orthopaedic surgeons treating elite athletes should combine an ACLR with a LEAP to improve ACL graft survivorship.

Background: Bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) autografts are widely considered the standard for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Purpose/Hypothesis: The aims of this study were to compare the clinical outcomes after ACLR with gold standard BPTB autografts versus combined ACLR + anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) with hamstring tendon (HT) autografts at medium-term follow-up in a large series of propensity-matched patients. The hypothesis was that combined ACLR + ALLR with HT autografts would result in lower graft rupture rates and non–graft rupture-related reoperation rates. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients undergoing combined ACLR + ALLR using HT autografts between January 2003 and December 2019 were propensity matched in a 1:1 ratio to patients undergoing isolated ACLR using BPTB autografts. At the end of the study period, graft ruptures, contralateral knee injuries, and any other reoperations or complications after the index procedure were identified by a search of a prospective database and a review of medical records. Results: A total of 1009 matched pairs were included. The mean duration of follow-up was 101.3 ± 59.9 months. Patients in the isolated group were >3-fold more likely to have graft failure than those in the combined group (hazard ratio, 3.554 [95% CI, 1.744-7.243]; P = .0005). Patients aged <20 years were at a particularly high risk of graft ruptures compared with patients aged >30 years (hazard ratio, 5.650 [95% CI, 1.834-17.241]; P = .0002). Additionally, there was a significantly higher reoperation rate after isolated ACLR than after combined ACLR + ALLR (20.5% vs 8.9%, respectively; P < .0001). The overall rate of subsequent contralateral ruptures was 9.1% after index surgery (isolated: 10.2%; combined: 8.0%; P = .0934), indicating that the risk profiles for both groups were similar. Conclusion: Patients who underwent isolated ACLR with BPTB autografts experienced significantly worse graft survivorship and overall reoperation-free survivorship compared with those who underwent combined ACLR + ALLR with HT autografts. The risk of graft ruptures was >3-fold higher in patients who underwent isolated ACLR using BPTB autografts.

No abstract

Background: Failure rates of repaired bucket-handle medial meniscal tears (BHMMTs) concomitant with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are as high as 20%. The outcomes of posteromedial portal suture hook repair have not been compared with all-inside repair techniques for this subtype of meniscal lesion. Purpose/Hypothesis: The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and failure rates of patients who underwent BHMMT repair concomitant with ACLR using an all-inside technique, suture hook + all-inside technique, or suture hook + outside-in technique. It was hypothesized that no significant differences in failure rates would be found between the groups. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients diagnosed with a BHMMT who underwent meniscal repair during primary ACLR and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients were grouped based on the meniscal repair technique used: all-inside repair, suture hook + all-inside repair, or suture hook + outside-in repair. At the end of the study period, secondary medial meniscectomy rates were determined. Results: The study population comprised 253 patients who underwent repair of a BHMMT with concomitant ACLR with a mean follow-up of 94.0 ± 47.6 months. A total of 114 patients (45.1%) underwent all-inside repair, 61 patients (24.1%) underwent suture hook + all-inside repair, and 78 patients (30.8%) underwent suture hook + outside-in repair. Overall, there were 36 failures. The failure rates were 20.2%, 14.8%, and 5.1%, respectively ( P = .0135). All-inside repairs were >4 times more likely to fail than suture hook + outside-in repairs (hazard ratio [HR], 4.103; 95% CI, 1.369-12.296; P = .0117). Failure was also 3 times higher (HR, 2.943; 95% CI, 1.224-7.075; P = .0159) for patients <30 years of age compared with those aged ≥30 years. An additional anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) was also found to reduce the failure rate of repaired BHMMTs concomitant with ACLR. Conclusion: Combined suture hook + outside-in repair of BHMMTs resulted in significantly fewer failures than all other techniques. Furthermore, age <30 years and no additional ALLR were associated with higher failure rates.

Background: Combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) and anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) have demonstrated reduced risk of graft rerupture as compared with isolated ACLR. However, concerns remain that the risk of osteoarthritis (OA) may be increased by the addition of ALLR. Purpose/Hypothesis: The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of OA with isolated ACLR in comparison with ACLR + ALLR at medium-term follow-up. We hypothesized that there would be no differences between the groups. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients who underwent ACLR + ALLR with hamstring tendon autograft between January 2011 and March 2012 were propensity matched to patients who underwent isolated ACLR with bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) or hamstring tendon autograft in the same period. Medium-term radiographic evaluation was performed using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) radiographic OA grading scale, modified Kellgren-Lawrence grade, and the surface fit method to assess percentage of joint space narrowing. Clinical outcomes were assessed with the following measures: IKDC, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Lysholm, Tegner, and ACL Return to Sport after Injury. Results: A total of 80 patients (42 ACLR + ALLR and 38 isolated ACLR) were analyzed with a mean follow-up of 104 months. There was no significant difference between groups for joint space narrowing in the medial or lateral tibiofemoral or lateral patellofemoral (PF) compartment. However, 36.8% in the isolated ACLR group versus 11.9% in the ACLR + ALLR group had narrowing of the medial PF compartment ( P = .0118). A lateral meniscal tear increased the risk of lateral tibiofemoral narrowing by nearly 5 times (odds ratio, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.547-19.367; P = .0123). The risk of medial PF narrowing was >4-fold with an isolated ACLR (odds ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.44-19.05; P = .0179). Between the isolated ACLR group and the ACLR + ALLR group, the secondary meniscectomy rate was 13.2% versus 11.9% (not significantly different). There was no difference between groups in KOOS, Tegner, or IKDC scores. There was also no difference between groups for grades of osteoarthritic change for any classification system. Patients who received a BPTB graft had medial PF joint narrowing in 66.7% of cases as compared with 11.9% in those who received ACLR + ALLR ( P = 0.118). Conclusion: ACLR + ALLR did not increase the risk of OA in the lateral tibiofemoral compartment when compared with an isolated ACLR at medium-term follow-up. Isolated ACLR using BPTB was associated with a significantly increased risk of medial PF joint space narrowing. Registration: NCT05123456 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Background: The optimum management strategy after failure of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (RACLR) is not clearly defined. The literature evaluating differences in outcomes between surgical and nonsurgical management is sparse. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to evaluate the outcomes of surgical versus nonsurgical management of failed first RACLR. It was hypothesized that the long-term clinical outcomes of second RACLR would be superior with respect to knee stability, return to sport, and patient-reported outcome measures when compared with nonsurgical treatment. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients who experienced failure of first RACLR were evaluated. All participants followed the same rehabilitation protocol regardless of whether they underwent nonsurgical treatment or a second RACLR. Follow-up comprised regular clinical review and a standardized telephone interview at the end of the study period. Patient-reported outcome measures were recorded at the final follow-up. Results: A total of 41 patients with a mean follow-up of 104 ± 52.7 months (range, 40-140 months) were evaluated. Of these, 31 underwent a second RACLR, and 10 patients chose nonsurgical treatment. There was a high rate of return to sport in both groups, but patients undergoing second RACLR had significantly better Tegner (6.35 vs 4.8; P = .012), Lysholm (88.5 vs 78.3; P = .0353), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Quality of Life (72.6 vs 56.3; P = .0490), and KOOS Sport and Recreation scores (81.4 vs 62.5; P = .0033). Significantly more patients undergoing second RACLR achieved the Patient Acceptable Symptom State for KOOS Sport and Recreation than those who underwent nonsurgical management (74.2% vs 30%; P = .015). The most important predictor of failure to achieve a good/excellent Lysholm score in multivariate analysis was nonsurgical management ( P = .0095). Conclusion: Both second RACLR and nonsurgical management of failed first RACLR were associated with high rates of return to sport. However, second RACLR was associated with significantly better functional outcome scores with respect to Tegner, Lysholm, KOOS Quality of Life, and KOOS Sport and Recreation scores compared to nonsurgical management. In addition, nonsurgical treatment was the only significant predictor of failure to achieve a good/excellent Lysholm score at the final follow-up, and this was likely a function of inferior knee stability in that group.

No abstract

No abstract