The posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) represents an intra-articular structure composed of two distinct bundles. Considering the anterior and posterior meniscofemoral ligaments, a total of four ligamentous fibre bundles of the posterior knee complex act synergistically to restrain posterior and rotatory tibial loads. Injury mechanisms associated with high-energy trauma and accompanying injury patterns may complicate the diagnostic evaluation and accuracy. Therefore, a thorough and systematic diagnostic workup is necessary to assess the severity of the PCL injury and to initiate an appropriate treatment approach. Since structural damage to the PCL occurs in more than one third of trauma patients experiencing acute knee injury with hemarthrosis, background knowledge for management of PCL injuries is important. In Part 1 of the evidence-based update on management of primary and recurrent PCL injuries, the anatomical, biomechanical, and diagnostic principles are presented. This paper aims to convey the anatomical and biomechanical knowledge needed for accurate diagnosis to facilitate subsequent decision-making in the treatment of PCL injuries.Level of evidence V.

Purpose To compare clinical outcomes, radiographic characteristics, and surgical factors between patients with single and multiple anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft failures. It was hypothesized that patients experiencing multiple ACL graft failures exhibit lower patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) and a higher (steeper) posterior tibial slope (PTS) than patients with single ACL graft failure. Methods Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included in this retrospective cohort study. Based on the number of ACL graft failures, patients were assigned either to the group “single ACL graft failure “or” multiple ACL graft failures “. The PTS was measured on strict lateral radiographs. Validated PROs including the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Lysholm Score, Tegner Activity Scale, ACL-Return to Sport after Injury Scale, and Visual Analogue Scale for pain were collected. Results Overall, 102 patients were included with 58 patients assigned to the single ACL graft failure group and 44 patients to the multiple ACL graft failures group. Quadriceps tendon autograft was used significantly more often (55% vs. 11%, p < 0.001) and allografts were used significantly less often (31% vs. 66%, p < 0.001) as the graft for first revision ACL reconstruction in patients with single versus multiple ACL graft failures. Patients with multiple ACL graft failures were associated with statistically significantly worse PROs (IKDC: 61.7 ± 19.3 vs. 77.4 ± 16.8, p < 0.05; Tegner Activity Scale: 4 (range, 0–7) vs. 6 (range 2–10), p < 0.05), higher PTS (12 ± 3° vs. 9 ± 3°, p < 0.001), and higher rates of subsequent surgery (73% vs. 14%, p < 0.001) and complications (45% vs. 17%, p < 0.05) than patients with single ACL graft failure. Conclusion Compared to single ACL graft failure in this study multiple ACL graft failures were associated with worse PROs, higher PTS, and allograft use. During the first revision ACL reconstruction, it is recommended to avoid the use of allografts and to consider slope-reducing osteotomies to avoid multiple ACL graft failures and improve PROs. Level of evidence Level 3.

Isolated and combined posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injuries are associated with severe limitations in daily, professional, and sports activities as well as with devastating long-term effects for the knee joint. As the number of primary and recurrent PCL injuries increases, so does the body of literature, with high-quality evidence evolving in recent years. However, the debate about the ideal treatment approach such as; operative vs. non-operative; single-bundle vs. double-bundle reconstruction; transtibial vs. tibial inlay technique, continues. Ultimately, the goal in the treatment of PCL injuries is restoring native knee kinematics and preventing residual posterior and combined rotatory knee laxity through an individualized approach. Certain demographic, anatomical, and surgical risk factors for failures in operative treatment have been identified. Failures after PCL reconstruction are increasing, confronting the treating surgeon with challenges including the need for revision PCL reconstruction. Part 2 of the evidence-based update on the management of primary and recurrent PCL injuries will summarize the outcomes of operative and non-operative treatment including indications, surgical techniques, complications, and risk factors for recurrent PCL deficiency. This paper aims to support surgeons in decision-making for the treatment of PCL injuries by systematically evaluating underlying risk factors, thus preventing postoperative complications and recurrent knee laxity. Level of evidence V.

Background: Meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) has become a viable treatment option for patients with symptomatic meniscal deficiency. Some patients experience early surgical meniscal allograft failure attributed to causes that have not yet been sufficiently clarified. Purpose: To evaluate the prevalence, types, and distribution of arthroscopically confirmed meniscal allograft tears and the associated effect on surgical meniscal allograft survival. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients undergoing MAT with a minimum 2-year follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Descriptive and surgical data were collected. Type and location of arthroscopically confirmed meniscal allograft tears were recorded and compared between medial and lateral allografts and suture-only and bone block fixation. A survival analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of meniscal allograft tears on surgical meniscal allograft survival. Results: This study included 142 patients (54% male; mean ± SD age, 29.6 ± 10.4 years) with a mean follow-up of 10.3 ± 7.5 years. The prevalence of meniscal allograft tears was 32%, observed at a median of 1.2 years (interquartile range, 2.8 years) after MAT. The posterior horns were most frequently affected, followed by the posterior roots, midbodies, anterior horns, and anterior roots. The most frequently observed tear types were root tears (43%), followed by longitudinal, horizontal, radial, complex, bucket-handle, and meniscocapsular separation tears. A statistically significant association was found between meniscal allograft tear types and fixation techniques ( P = .027), with root tears predominant after suture-only as compared with bone block fixation (57% vs 22%). Patients with meniscal allograft root tears were a mean of 5.4 years (95% CI, 1.6-9.2 years; P = .007) younger than were patients without root tears. The 1-year surgical meniscal allograft survival rate was significantly lower for torn versus intact meniscal allografts (75% vs 99%; P < .001). Conclusion: Meniscal allograft root tears were predominant, associated with younger patient age, and more often observed when using the suture-only fixation technique versus the bone block fixation technique. Torn meniscal allografts were associated with early surgical graft failure when compared with intact meniscal allografts, resulting in a significantly lower 1-year survival rate.

Postoperative patient satisfaction after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) is influenced mainly by the degree of pain, the need for reoperation, and functional performance in daily activities and sports. Graft choice has shown to have an influence on postoperative outcomes after ACL-R. While patient reported outcomes measurements do not differ between graft options, evidence shows that normal knee kinematics is not fully restored after ACL-R with an increase in postoperative anterior tibial translation (ATT). Postoperative graft rupture rates seem to favor bone-patella-tendon-bone (BPTB) and quadriceps tendon (QT) autografts over HT or allografts. While return to sports rates seem comparable between different graft types, postoperative extensor strength is reduced in patients with BPTB and QT whereas flexion strength is weakened in patients with HT. Postoperative donor site morbidity is highest in BPTB but comparable between HT and QT. With all graft options having advantages and drawbacks, graft choice must be individualized and chosen in accordance with the patient.

Graft selection in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is critical, as it remains one of the most easily adjustable factors affecting graft rupture and reoperation rates. Commonly used autografts, including hamstring tendon, quadriceps tendon and bone-patellar-tendon-bone, are reported to be biomechanically equivalent or superior compared to the native ACL. Despite this, such grafts are unable to perfectly replicate the complex anatomical and histological characteristics of the native ACL. While there remains inconclusive evidence as to the superiority of one autograft in terms of graft incorporation and maturity, allografts appear to demonstrate slower incorporation and maturity compared to autografts. Graft fixation also affects graft properties and subsequent outcomes, with each technique having unique advantages and disadvantages that should be carefully considered during graft selection.

Purpose To evaluate the efect of posterior tibial slope (PTS) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) graft failure after PCL reconstruction. Methods Patients undergoing PCL reconstruction with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included in this retrospective cohort study. A chart review was performed to collect patient-, injury-, and surgery-related data. Medial PTS was measured on preoperative lateral radiographs. Validated PROs, including the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Lysholm Score, Tegner Activity Scale, and Visual Analogue Scale for pain, were collected at inal follow-up. A correlation analysis was conducted to assess the relationship between PTS and PROs. A logistic regression model was performed to evaluate if PTS could predict PCL graft failure. Results Overall, 79 patients with a mean age of 28.6 ± 11.7 years and a mean follow-up of 5.7 ± 3.3 years were included. After a median time from injury of 4.0 months, isolated and combined PCL reconstruction was performed in 22 (28%) and 57 (72%) patients, respectively. There were no statistically signiicant diferences in PROs and PTS between patients undergoing isolated and combined PCL reconstruction (non-signiicant [n.s.]). There were no signiicant correlations between PTS and PROs (n.s.). In total, 14 (18%) patients experienced PCL graft failure after a median time of 17.5 months following PCL reconstruction. Patients with PCL graft failure were found to have statistically signiicantly lower PTS than patients without graft failure (7.0 ± 2.3° vs. 9.2 ± 3.3°, p < 0.05), while no diferences were found in PROs (n.s.). PTS was shown to be a signiicant predictor of PCL graft failure, with a 1.3-fold increase in the odds of graft failure for each one-degree reduction in PTS (p < 0.05). Conclusions This study showed that PTS does not afect PROs after PCL reconstruction, but that PTS represents a surgically modiiable predictor of PCL graft failure. Level of evidence III.

Our objective is to report and define 'operative time' in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) posterior spinal fusion surgeries. Documenting key times during surgery are important to compare operative risks, assess learning curves, and evaluate team efficiency in AIS surgery. 'Operative time' in literature has not been standardized. Systematic review was performed by two reviewers. Keywords included operative time, duration of surgery, and scoliosis. One thousand nine hundred six studies were identified, 1092 duplicates were removed and 670 abstracts were excluded. Of the 144 articles, 67 met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies were evaluated for number of patients, operative time, and definition of operative time. Meta-analysis was not performed due to confounders. Of the 67 studies (6678 patients), only 14 (1565 patients) defined operative time, and all specified as incision to closure. From these 14 studies, the median operative time was 248 minutes (range 174-448 minutes). In the 53 studies (5113 patients) without a definition, one study reported time in a non-comparable format, therefore, data were analyzed for 52 studies (5078 patients) with a median operative time of 252 minutes (wider range 139-523 minutes). A clear standardized definition of operative or surgical time in spine surgery does not exist. We believe that operative time should be clearly described for each published study for accurate documentation and be defined from incision time to spine dressing completion time in order to standardize study results. Level of evidence: IV.