PurposeTo compare acute ACL reconstruction (ACLR) within 8 days of injury with delayed reconstruction after normalized range of motion (ROM), 6–10 weeks after injury. It was hypothesized that acute ACL reconstruction with modern techniques is safe and can be beneficial in terms of patient-reported outcomes and range of motion.MethodsSample size calculation indicated 64 patients would be required to find a 5° difference in ROM at 3 months. Seventy patients with high recreational activity level, Tegner level 6 or more, were randomized to acute (within 8 days) or delayed (6–10 weeks) ACLR between 2006 and 2013. During the first 3 months following surgery patients were contacted weekly by SMS and asked ‘How is your knee functioning?’, with answers given on a Visual-Analog Scale (0–10). ROM was assessed after 3 months by the rehab physiotherapist. Patient-reported outcomes, objective IKDC and manual stability measurements were collected by an independent physiotherapist not involved in the rehab at the 6-month follow-up.ResultsAt 3-month follow-up, 91% of the patients were assessed with no significant differences in flexion, extension or total ROM demonstrated between groups. At the 6-month follow-up, the acute group had significantly less muscle atrophy of the thigh muscle compared to the contralateral leg. Furthermore, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the acute group passed or were close to passing the one leg hop test (47 versus 21%, p = 0.009). No difference was found between the groups in the other clinical assessments. Additionally, no significant difference between the groups was found in terms of associated injuries.ConclusionAcute ACLR within 8 days of injury does not appear to adversely affect ROM or result in increased stiffness in the knee joint when compared to delayed surgery.Level of evidenceII.

Purpose To compare acute ACL reconstruction (ACLR) within 8 days of injury with delayed reconstruction after normalized range of motion (ROM), 6-10 weeks after injury. It was hypothesized that acute ACL reconstruction with modern techniques is safe and can be beneficial in terms of patient-reported outcomes and range of motion. Methods The effect of acute and delayed ACLR was randomized studied on 70 patients with high recreational activity level, Tegner level 6 or more, between 2006 and 2013. Patient-reported outcomes, objective IKDC, KOOS, and manual stability measurements were documented during the 24-month follow-up period. Results The acute ACLR group did not result in increased stiffness and showed superior outcome regarding strength and how the patient felt their knee functioning at 24 months. In addition, the acute group was not inferior to the delayed group in any assessment. Regarding patient-related outcomes in KOOS, both groups showed significant improvements in all subscales, but no difference was found between the groups. Functional return (FR) rate was almost double compared to the Swedish knee ligament register and treatment failure (TF) rate was reduced by half, no significant difference between the groups. No difference regarding cyclops removal, re-injury of ACL or meniscus was found between the two surgical timing groups. Conclusion Acute ACLR within 8 days of injury does not appear to adversely affect ROM or result in increased stiffness in the knee joint and was not inferior to the delayed group in any assessment when compared to delayed surgery. Level of evidence I.

Purpose To compare the total number of sick-leave days caused by the knee injury from the day of injury and over the first year between acute (within 8 days) and delayed (6-10 weeks) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and also assess other clinical outcomes during this period. Methods Seventy patients with an acute ACL injury and Tegner level of 6 or more were randomized to acute (within 8 days) or delayed (after 6-10 weeks) ACLR. Patient-reported outcomes; objective IKDC and manual stability measurements were assessed at 6 and 12 months. With data from the Swedish Social Insurance Agency (Försäkringskassan) information about the number of sick-leave days due to the knee injury over the following 12 months was collected and compared between the two groups. Results Seventy-one percent received compensation for sick leave (26 in the acute versus 23 in the delayed group). The mean number of sick-leave days for the acute group was significantly lower (M = 56.9, SD = 36.4) compared to the delayed group (M = 88.5, SD = 50.2), p < 0.05. The acute group was also significantly stronger in flexion in both slow and fast angle velocities according to Biodex ®. No other differences were found between the groups in other clinical assessments or in terms of associated injuries. Conclusion Acute and delayed ACLR provided comparable clinical outcomes after 12 months. Acute reconstruction resulted in less sick-leave days and as such fewer indirect costs to the individual and society. These findings suggest that if patients requiring ACLR can be identified early and ACLR can be performed in the acute phase, socioeconomic costs can potentially be reduced by minimizing time off work. Level of evidence II.

Purpose To compare muscle strength and patient reported outcomes following ACLR using a semitendinosus (ST) graft from the ipsilateral (IL) leg compared to a graft from the contralateral (CL) leg. Methods One-hundred and forty patients with an ACL injury were randomized to IL or CL ACLR. Patients were assessed at 6, 12 and 24 months with isokinetic and isometric muscle strength measured using Biodex. Patient-reported outcomes and manual stability measurements were also recorded. Results Patient-related outcomes improved over time for both groups with no significant differences between groups at any time point. No differences between groups in objective knee assessment scores or rerupture rates were found. The IL group was significantly weaker in knee flexion strength at all time points compared to the CL group, additionally the IL group did not recover flexor strength within 2 years. Conclusion This study demonstrated that utilizing an ST graft harvested from the uninjured limb for ACLR facilitates early isokinetic and isometric strength recovery, with no significant adverse outcomes demonstrated in other measurements and therefore be performed to reduce the risk of long-term strength deficits in the injured leg Level of evidence II.