A novel surgical technique for revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using an isolated rectus femoris tendon autograft.

INTRODUCTION: Only a few anatomic studies have described an isolated rectus femoris tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This study aims to demonstrate a new surgical technique utilising the rectus femoris tendon for ACL reconstruction. This study hypothesises that the rectus tendon autograft will yield satisfying postoperative outcomes in terms of stability, with minimal complications at the harvest site. METHODS: This retrospective study investigated the outcomes of 28 revision ACL reconstructions using a rectus tendon autograft with a mean follow-up of 41.7 (range, 24.0-64.8) months. A 3 cm longitudinal incision was used to harvest the rectus tendon with an open tendon stripper. Intraoperative collected data included the length of the tendon and thickness of a 4-fold graft. Further outcome parameters include anterior cruciate ligament stability and range of motion. Additionally, postoperative complications, especially donor site morbidity, were documented in type and frequency. RESULTS: The mean tendon length measured 32.4 cm (range, 30-35 cm). After preparing a 4-fold graft, the mean diameter was 9.2 mm (range, 8.0-10 mm) at the tibial and 9.0 mm (range, 7.5-10 mm) at the femoral end. Stability evaluated by the Lachman test improved significantly from 2 (Interquartile range (IQR), 2-3) preoperatively to 0 (IQR, 0-1) postoperatively (p < .001). Rerupture of the anterior cruciate ligament graft was observed in 2 patients (7.1%). Four patients showed a persistent extension deficit of about 5 degrees postoperatively. Two of them underwent revision surgery due to a Cyclops lesion. Only one patient complained of prolonged pain at the harvest site (3.6%). CONCLUSION: The 4-fold rectus tendon represents a novel autograft technique in revision ACL reconstruction. This study provides evidence of appropriate graft dimensions and satisfying postoperative outcomes regarding stability. The technique is associated with a low complication rate at the harvest site. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, IV.

Effect of graft types for outcomes in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This meta-analysis was performed to compare outcomes among different types of graft for revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). METHODS: A comprehensive search from Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library was performed to identify relevant articles. Studies that conducted a comparative analysis on outcomes among different types of grafts were included. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 software. RESULTS: In total, 7 non-randomized studies with a minimum 1-year follow-up were included in analysis, and all studies compared outcomes between autograft and allograft. International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee (IKDC) scores and side-to-side anterior laxity were not significantly different between autograft and allograft. Revision ACLR with allograft had a higher risk of failure than autograft at the final follow-up (OR=2.22, 95% CI=1.55-3.18). The rates of return to pre-injury type of sport and return to same and higher level of pre-injury sport were not significantly different between autograft and allograft. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of IKDC score, side-to-side anterior laxity, and rates of return to sport were not significantly different between autograft and allograft. Autografts provide a significantly lower risk of failure than allografts in revision ACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; meta-analysis.

Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes After Proximal Tibia Anterior Closing-Wedge Osteotomy With ACL Reconstruction.

Background: While increased posterior tibial slope (PTS) is an important risk factor for failure after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, controversy exists regarding indications and outcomes of proximal tibia anterior closing-wedge osteotomy (ACWO) with concomitant ACL reconstruction in patients with ACL tears. Purpose: To assess clinical outcomes after combined ACL reconstruction and proximal tibia ACWO. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, we performed a systematic review of the existing literature on ACWO and ACL reconstruction using PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Embase. The search phrases included "anterior closing wedge osteotomy,""anterior closing wedge tibial osteotomy,""anterior closing wedge proximal tibial osteotomy,""anterior cruciate ligament," and "revision anterior cruciate ligament." Non-English publications and single-patient case reports were excluded. Extracted data included study details, patient demographics, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, complications, and return-to-sport (RTS) rates. Results: A total of 6 studies with 110 patients (110 knees) were included. Two-stage ACWO and ACL reconstruction was reported in 2 studies of 78 patients (71%), while a single-stage technique was reported in 4 studies of 32 patients (29%). ACWO was performed in the setting of primary ACL tear in 23 patients (21%) and in recurrent ACL tear in 87 patients (79%). Patients demonstrated postoperative improvements in Lysholm, pivot-shift test, and side-to-side difference in anterior tibial translation. After ACWO, all studies reported mean postoperative PTS of <10° (range, 4.4°-9.2°). Of patients with available RTS data (n = 43), the same-level RTS rate ranged from 65% to 100%. A two-stage procedure reported in 1 study had a lower RTS rate (n = 13 of 20 [65%]) than that of 2 studies with single-stage procedure (n = 4 of 5 [80%] and n = 18 of 18 [100%]). The overall complication rate was 0.9% to 1.3%, and there were no reported ACL retears. Conclusion: The current evidence, which is constrained by the quantity and quality of studies, showed that ACWO with single- or two-stage ACL reconstruction in patients with ACL insufficiency and increased PTS was associated with significant improvements in PROs and high RTS rates.

Effect of Age and Femoral Tunnel Drilling Technique on the Prevalence of Intra-articular Pathology at Both Primary and Revision ACL Reconstruction.

Background: Studies have shown that meniscal and chondral lesions are more common at the time of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) compared with primary surgery; however, few have evaluated the same patients through both primary and revision surgery. Purpose: To describe the prevalence of meniscal and chondral lesions at the time of primary and subsequent revision ACLR and to determine the effect of age and femoral tunnel drilling technique on the development of intra-articular pathology over time. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: All patients who had primary and subsequent revision ACLR in the same knee between 1997 and 2022 were identified from a prospectively collated database. The grading of chondral surfaces in each compartment, the presence of any meniscal tears, and treatment performed were recorded. Patients were grouped according to age and femoral tunnel drilling technique to allow subgroup analysis. Results: Overall, 262 patients were included. Median age at primary surgery was 20.2 years. Lateral meniscal tears were more prevalent than medial tears at both primary (34.7% vs 28.2%; P = .11) and revision surgery (44.3% vs 40.8%; P = .43). Chondral lesions were most frequently found on the patella (8.8%) and the medial femoral condyle (MFC; 8.0%) at primary surgery. Between surgeries, new lesions developed most commonly on the MFC (13.0%) and the lateral femoral condyle (LFC; 11.1%). It was significantly more common for lateral meniscal tears treated with repair or left in situ at primary surgery to be healed at the time of revision surgery than medial tears (P = .01). Significantly more patients who had transtibial drilling of the femoral tunnel had a new meniscal tear at revision surgery (P = .001). Age did not have a significant influence on the prevalence of meniscal pathology. Conclusion: The prevalence of intra-articular pathology increased between primary and revision ACLR. Lateral meniscal tears were more prevalent than medial tears at both surgeries. At revision surgery, new chondral lesions were more commonly found on the MFC than the LFC. The higher incidence of new meniscal tears observed in the transtibial group may reflect the more vertical graft orientation with this technique and its inferior ability to control rotation.

Quadriceps tendon autograft has similar clinical outcomes when compared to hamstring tendon and bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts for revision ACL reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Research regarding revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (RACLR) with quadriceps tendon (QT) autografts is lacking. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of RACLR with QT and compare its patient outcomes to RACLR with hamstring tendon (HT) and bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) autografts. METHODS: Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, a search for studies using QT in RACLR was performed within PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL from database date of inception through December 26, 2022. Primary outcomes sought included: failure rate, Lysholm scores, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, IKDC grades, arthrometric knee side-to-side differences (STSD), pivot shift grade, donor site morbidity, return to sport, visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores. RESULTS: Nine studies were included consisting of 606 RACLR: 349 QT, 169 HT, and 88 BTB. Overall failure rates were 7.6% QT, 13.3% HT, and 8.7% BTB. Mean weighted Lysholm scores were 85.8 ± 3.8 QT, 82.5 ± 3.8 HT and 86.6 ± 4.5 BTB. IKDC average scores were 82.3 ± 1.6 QT, 80.1 ± 1.7 HT, and 81.7 ± 5.5BTB. Combined rates of IKDC A/B grades were 88.4% and 80.0% for QT and HT, respectively. VAS average scores were 0.9 ± 1.1 QT, 1.4 ± 0.2 HT, and 0.7 ± 0.8 for BTB. Side-to-side difference was reported for QT and HT with average values of 1.7 ± 0.6 mm and 2.1 ± 0.5 mm, respectively. Grade 0 or 1 pivot shifts were reported in 96.2% of QT patients and 91.3% of HT. Donor site morbidity, only reported for QT and HT, was 14.6 ± 9.7% and 23.6 ± 14.1%, respectively. QT resulted in a mean Tegner score of 5.9 ± 1.5 versus HT 5.7 ± 1.5. Rate of return to pivoting sports was 38.0% QT, 48.6% HT, and 76.9% BTB. Across all outcomes, there was no significant difference when comparing QT to HT, QT to BTB, and QT compared to HT and BTB combined. CONCLUSIONS: RACLR with QT yields satisfactory patient reported outcomes, satisfactory improvement in knee laxity, expected return to sport rates, and has an overall 7.6% failure rate. Outcomes are comparative to those of HT and BTB making it an acceptable graft choice for RACLR. Surgeons should consider using QT autograft for RACLR, especially when other autografts are unavailable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Additional Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Helps Patients Improve Dynamic Postural Stability in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Background and Objectives: The goal in treating anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury especially in revision cases is return to sports activity by regaining dynamic postural stability. Among various methods to achieve this goal, additional anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) is gaining attention. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of additional ALLR in revision ACL reconstruction (RACLR). Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent RACLR between July 2015 and June 2018 were enrolled. The exclusion criteria were less than 1-year follow-up, age older than 45 years, concomitant multiple ligament injuries, contralateral knee injury, subtotal or total meniscectomized state, and articular cartilage lesions worse than Outerbridge grade 3. Thirty-nine patients (20 patients; RACLR only (Group A), 19 patients; RACLR with additional ALLR (Group B)) were included. Clinical scores (Lysholm score, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Tegner activity scale), isokinetic strength test, single-leg-hop for distance test (SLHDT), Y-balance test (YBT) were checked preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively. Results: Limb symmetry index values in YBT showed significantly better result in Group B 1-year postoperatively (Group A: 97.2 ± 4.0, Group B: 100.3 ± 2.9, p = 0.010), although there were no differences preoperatively between groups (Group A: 90.4 ± 6.7, Group B: 89.3 ± 5.5, p = 0.594). Regarding clinical scores, isokinetic strength tests, and SLHDT, there were no differences between groups preoperatively nor 1-year postoperatively. Conclusions: Additional ALLR in RACLR helped patients gain better dynamic postural stability at 1-year postoperative follow-up.

Closing-Wedge Posterior Tibial Slope-Reducing Osteotomy in Complex Revision ACL Reconstruction.

Background: A posterior tibial slope (PTS) >12° has been shown to correlate with failure of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR). PTS-reducing osteotomy has been described to correct the PTS in patients with a deficient ACL, mostly after failure of primary ACLR. Purpose: To report radiologic indices, clinical outcomes, and postoperative complications after PTS-reducing osteotomy performed concurrently with revision ACLR (R-ACLR). Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A review of medical records at 3 institutions was performed of patients who had undergone PTS-reducing osteotomy concurrently with R-ACLR between August 2010 and October 2020. Radiologic parameters recorded included the PTS, patellar height according to the Caton-Deschamps Index (CDI), and anterior tibial translation (ATT). Patient-reported outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS]), reoperations, and complications were evaluated. Results: Included were 23 patients with a mean follow-up of 26.7 months (range, 6-84 months; median, 22.5 months). Statistically significant differences from preoperative to postoperative values were found in PTS (median [range], 14.0° [12°-18°] vs 4.0° [0°-15°], respectively; P < .001), CDI (median, 1.00 vs 1.10, respectively; P = .04) and ATT (median, 8.5 vs 3.6 mm, respectively; P = .001). At the final follow-up, the IKDC score was 52.4 ± 19.2 and the KOOS subscale scores were 81.5 ± 9.5 (Pain), 74 ± 21.6 (Symptoms), 88.5 ± 8 (Activities of Daily Living); 52.5 ± 21.6 (Sport and Recreation), and 48.8 ± 15.8 (Quality of Life). A traumatic ACL graft failure occurred in 2 patients (8.7%). Reoperations were necessary for 6 patients (26.1%) because of symptomatic hardware, and atraumatic recurrent knee instability was diagnosed in 1 patient (4.3%). Conclusion: Tibial slope-reducing osteotomy resulted in a significant decrease of ATT and can be considered in patients with a preoperative PTS ≥12° and ≥1 ACLR failure. In highly complex patients with multiple prior surgeries, the authors found a reasonably low graft failure rate (8.7%) when utilizing PTS-reducing osteotomy. Surgeons must be aware of potential complications in patients with multiple previous failed ACLRs.

Descriptive Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With and Without Tunnel Bone Grafting.

BACKGROUND: Lytic or malpositioned tunnels may require bone grafting during revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (rACLR) surgery. Patient characteristics and effects of grafting on outcomes after rACLR are not well described. PURPOSE: To describe preoperative characteristics, intraoperative findings, and 2-year outcomes for patients with rACLR undergoing bone grafting procedures compared with patients with rACLR without grafting. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 1234 patients who underwent rACLR were prospectively enrolled between 2006 and 2011. Baseline revision and 2-year characteristics, surgical technique, pathology, treatment, and patient-reported outcome instruments (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and Marx Activity Rating Scale [Marx]) were collected, as well as subsequent surgery information, if applicable. The chi-square and analysis of variance tests were used to compare group characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 159 patients (13%) underwent tunnel grafting-64 (5%) patients underwent 1-stage and 95 (8%) underwent 2-stage grafting. Grafting was isolated to the femur in 31 (2.5%) patients, the tibia in 40 (3%) patients, and combined in 88 patients (7%). Baseline KOOS Quality of Life (QoL) and Marx activity scores were significantly lower in the 2-stage group compared with the no bone grafting group (P≤ .001). Patients who required 2-stage grafting had more previous ACLRs (P < .001) and were less likely to have received a bone-patellar tendon-bone or a soft tissue autograft at primary ACLR procedure (P≤ .021) compared with the no bone grafting group. For current rACLR, patients undergoing either 1-stage or 2-stage bone grafting were more likely to receive a bone-patellar tendon-bone allograft (P≤ .008) and less likely to receive a soft tissue autograft (P≤ .003) compared with the no bone grafting group. At 2-year follow-up of 1052 (85%) patients, we found inferior outcomes in the 2-stage bone grafting group (IKDC score = 68; KOOS QoL score = 44; KOOS Sport/Recreation score = 65; and Marx activity score = 3) compared with the no bone grafting group (IKDC score = 77; KOOS QoL score = 63; KOOS Sport/Recreation score = 75; and Marx activity score = 7) (P≤ .01). The 1-stage bone graft group did not significantly differ compared with the no bone grafting group. CONCLUSION: Tunnel bone grafting was performed in 13% of our rACLR cohort, with 8% undergoing 2-stage surgery. Patients treated with 2-stage grafting had inferior baseline and 2-year patient-reported outcomes and activity levels compared with patients not undergoing bone grafting. Patients treated with 1-stage grafting had similar baseline and 2-year patient-reported outcomes and activity levels compared with patients not undergoing bone grafting.

Prevalence and Incidence of Chondral and Meniscal Lesions in Patients Undergoing Primary and Subsequent Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: An Analysis of 213 Patients From the SANTI Group.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown a higher prevalence of meniscal and chondral lesions at the time of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (R-ACLR) compared with primary ACLR procedures. However, studies that follow the development of meniscal and chondral status through primary and subsequent R-ACLR are scarce. PURPOSE: To compare the prevalence of meniscal and chondral injuries in patients undergoing primary ACLR and subsequent R-ACLR. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Patients who underwent ACLR and subsequently needed R-ACLR between January 2009 and February 2018 in a single center were included. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was conducted. RESULTS: A total of 213 patients were included, with a mean follow-up of 59.7 months. The mean age was 22 years at primary ACLR and 26.1 years at the time of revision. The proportion of meniscal tears was higher at the time of R-ACLR compared with the time of primary reconstruction (70.0% vs 44.6%, respectively; P < .001). Similarly, the prevalence of chondral lesions was significantly higher at the time of revision versus the primary reconstruction (15.5% vs 7.0%, respectively; P = .003). CONCLUSION: R-ACLR is associated with a higher rate of concomitant meniscal and chondral lesions than primary ACLR.

Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Graft Combined With Modified Lemaire Technique Versus Hamstring Graft Combined With Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction: A Clinical Comparative Matched Study With a Mean Follow-up of 5 Years From The SANTI Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) has recently been correlated with improved clinical outcomes and reduced failure rates in revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR). However, no data are available on clinical outcomes and reoperation after revision ACLR using different LET procedures. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of ACL + anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction using hamstring tendon graft (HT-ALL) and a bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) graft + modified Lemaire tenodesis procedure (BPTB-Lemaire) in the setting of revision ACLR and to determine whether ALL reconstruction is associated with an increased rate of adverse outcomes when compared with a modified Lemaire tenodesis procedure. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Descriptive data and clinical outcomes were prospectively collected from patients who underwent revision ACLR with LET between 2009 and 2018 with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients with an HT autograft combined with ALL reconstruction (HT-ALL group) were matched in a 1:1 propensity ratio to patients with a BPTB autograft combined with a modified Lemaire LET procedure (BPTB-Lemaire group). The evaluated parameters included complications and reoperations; knee laxity tests; return to sports; and various scores, including the Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity scale, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Return to Sport After Injury scale, Marx activity rating scale, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee evaluation form, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. RESULTS: In total, 36 matched pairs were included in the analysis. The mean follow-up durations for the BPTB-Lemaire and HT-ALL groups were 56 ± 35 and 57 ± 23 months, respectively (P = .91). No significant differences were found in graft rupture rate (HT-ALL, 0%; BPTB-Lemaire, 11.1%; P = .13) or reoperations (HT-ALL, 8.3%; BPTB-Lemaire, 22.2%; P = .23). No specific complications with regard to LET were noted in either group. Additionally, there were no significant differences in knee laxity parameters, return to sports, or clinical scores between the groups at the final follow-up, except for the Tegner activity scale score (HT-ALL, 6.4; BPTB-Lemaire, 7.3; P = .03). HT-ALL was associated with a shorter surgical time (41.4 vs 59.8 minutes; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: HT-ALL was at least equivalent, in terms of clinical outcomes, to the more commonly performed procedure, BPTB-Lemaire. Performing ALL reconstruction in the setting of revision ACLR is therefore safe and effective.

Double-Layered Quadriceps Tendon Autografts Provide Lower Failure Rates and Improved Clinical Results Compared With Hamstring Tendon Grafts in Revision ACL Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: We developed a quadriceps-tendon graft technique using a double-layered, partial-thickness, soft tissue quadriceps tendon graft (dlQUAD) for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). This technique allows simple femoral loop button fixation and a limited harvest depth of the quadriceps tendon. PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcome of patients undergoing revision ACLR using the dlQUAD technique compared with a hamstring tendon graft (HT). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 114 patients who underwent revision ACLR between 2017 and 2018 were included in this retrospective case series. At a mean follow-up of 26.9 ± 3.7 months (range, 24-36), 89 patients (dlQUAD: n = 43, HT: n = 46) were clinically examined. In addition, patients completed the Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Postoperative failure of the revision ACLR was defined as a side-to-side difference (SSD) in Rolimeter testing ≥5 mm or a pivot-shift grade of 2 or 3. RESULTS: Nine patients (10.1%) were identified with a failed revision ACLR. There was a significantly lower failure rate with dlQUAD versus the HT group (2.3% vs 17.4%; P = .031). The mean postoperative SSD was significantly less in the dlQUAD group (1.3 ± 1.3 mm [range, 0-5] vs 1.8 ± 2.2 mm [range, 0-9]; P = .043). At the latest follow-up, Tegner and IKDC scores significantly improved in the dlQUAD group compared with the HT group (Tegner: 5.8 ± 1.8 vs 5.6 ± 1.5; P = .043; IKDC: 83.8 ± 12.2 vs 78.6 ± 16.8; P = .037). The pain VAS score was also significantly reduced in the dlQUAD group compared with the HT group (0.9 ± 1.1 vs 1.6 ± 2.0; P = .014). CONCLUSION: The dlQUAD and HT techniques both demonstrated significant improvement of preoperative knee laxity and satisfactory patient-reported outcome measures after revision ACLR. Compared with the HT grafts, the dlQUAD technique showed lower failure rates and small increases in Tegner and IKDC scores.

Outcomes of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in soccer players : a cohort study.

AIMS: There is limited information on outcomes of revision ACL reconstruction (rACLR) in soccer (association football) athletes, particularly on return to sport and the rate of additional knee surgery. The purpose of this study was to report return to soccer after rACLR, and to test the hypothesis that patient sex and graft choice are associated with return to play and the likelihood of future knee surgery in soccer players undergoing rACLR. METHODS: Soccer athletes enrolled in a prospective multicentre cohort were contacted to collect ancillary data on their participation in soccer and their return to play following rACLR. Information regarding if and when they returned to play and their current playing status was recorded. If they were not currently playing soccer, they were asked the primary reason they stopped playing. Information on any subsequent knee surgery following their index rACLR was also collected. Player demographic data and graft choice were collected from their baseline enrolment data at rACLR. RESULTS: Soccer-specific follow-up was collected on 76% (33 male, 39 female) of 95 soccer athletes. Subsequent surgery information was collected on 95% (44 male, 46 female). Overall, 63% of athletes returned to soccer a mean 9.6 months (SD 5.8) after index revision surgery but participation in soccer decreased to 19% at a mean of 6.4 years (SD 1.3) after surgery. There was no significant association of patient sex or graft choice with return to play, time of return to play, or long-term return to play. Females were more likely than males to have subsequent knee surgery following rACLR (20% (9/46) vs 5% (2/44); p = 0.050). The rate of recurrent graft tear (5.6%; 5/90) was similar between males and females. CONCLUSION: Approximately two-thirds of soccer players return to sport after rACLR, but the rate of participation drops significantly over time. Neither patient sex nor graft choice at the time of rACLR were associated with return to play. Female soccer players face a higher risk for additional knee surgery after rACLR than male soccer players. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(12):1043-1048.

Influence of Preoperative Tunnel Widening On the Outcomes of a Single Stage-Only Approach to Every Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: An Analysis of 409 Consecutive Patients From the SANTI Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative tunnel widening is a frequently reported indication for performing a 2-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) instead of a single-stage procedure. However, the strength of the available evidence to support a 2-stage strategy is low. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of a single stage-only approach to revision ACLR. It was hypothesized that this approach would be associated with significant improvements from baseline in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and knee stability and that there would be no significant differences in any postoperative outcomes between patients with and without preoperative tunnel widening. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of a large series of consecutive patients undergoing revision ACLR with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Preoperative tunnel widening was assessed using digital radiographs. All patients underwent single-stage surgery with an outside-in technique, regardless of the degree of tunnel widening. Clinical outcomes were compared according to whether tunnel widening was present (either tunnel ≥12 mm) or not (both tunnels <12 mm). RESULTS: The study included 409 patients with a mean ± SD follow-up of 69.6 ± 29.0 months. After revision ACLR, there was a significant reduction in the side-to-side anteroposterior laxity difference, from 7.7 ± 2.2 mm preoperatively to 1.2 ± 1.1 mm at 2 years (P < .001). The mean International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and all subscales of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) exceeded the thresholds for the Patient Acceptable Symptom State defined for primary ACLR. An overall 358 patients had retrievable preoperative radiographs. According to the tunnel diameter measurements, 111 patients were allocated to group A (both tunnels <12 mm) and 247 patients to group B (either/both tunnels ≥12 mm). There were no significant differences between groups with respect to anteroposterior side-to-side laxity difference, graft rupture rates, non-graft rupture related reoperations, or contralateral anterior cruciate ligament injury rates. There was also no significant difference between groups that exceeded minimal detectable change thresholds for any of the PROMs recorded (ACL-RSI [Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sports After Injury], Lysholm, Tegner, IKDC, KOOS). CONCLUSION: A single-stage approach to revision ACLR is associated with excellent clinical results when an outside-in drilling technique is utilized. The presence of preoperative tunnel widening does not significantly influence PROMs, knee stability, graft rupture rates, or non-graft rupture related reoperation rates.

Slope-Correction Osteotomy with Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis and Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Highly Effective in Treating High-Grade Anterior Knee Laxity.

BACKGROUND: Both an elevated posterior tibial slope (PTS) and high-grade anterior knee laxity are often present in patients who undergo revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery, and these conditions are independent risk factors for ACL graft failure. Clinical data on slope-correction osteotomy combined with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) do not yet exist. PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and slope-correction osteotomy combined with LET. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2018, we performed a 2-stage procedure: slope-correction osteotomy was performed first, and then revision ACLR in combination with LET was performed in 22 patients with ACLR failure and high-grade anterior knee laxity. Twenty patients (6 women and 14 men; mean age, 27.8 ± 8.6 years; range, 18-49 years) were evaluated, with a mean follow-up of 30.5 ± 9.3 months (range, 24-56 months), in this retrospective case series. Postoperative failure was defined as a side-to-side difference of ≥5 mm in the Rolimeter test and a pivot-shift grade of 2 or 3. RESULTS: The PTS decreased from 15.3° to 8.9°, the side-to-side difference decreased from 7.2 to 1.1 mm, and the pivot shift was no longer evident in any of the patients. No patients exhibited revision ACLR failure and all patients showed good to excellent postoperative functional scores (mean ± SD: visual analog scale, 0.5 ± 0.6; Tegner, 6.1 ± 0.9; Lysholm, 90.9 ± 6.4; Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS] Symptoms, 95.2 ± 8.4; KOOS Pain, 94.7 ± 5.2; KOOS Activities of Daily Living, 98.5 ± 3.2; KOOS Function in Sport and Recreation, 86.8 ± 12.4; and KOOS Quality of Life, 65.4 ± 14.9). CONCLUSION: Slope-correction osteotomy in combination with LET is a safe and reliable procedure in patients with high-grade anterior knee laxity and a PTS of ≥12°. Normal knee joint stability was restored and good to excellent functional scores were achieved after a follow-up of at least 2 years.

Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in the Nonathlete Population.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable literature about revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in athletes vut there is little published evidence about the same in the nonathletes. The injury itself may remain underdiagnosed and untreated in nonsports persons. This study highlights the high incidence of ACL injury in the nonathletic patient cohort, revision rates, and the outcomes of revision ACL reconstruction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 856 nonathletic patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction were included in this retrospective study. Patients were asked on phone whether they had undergone revision surgery and whether they had symptoms severe enough to seek reintervention. Clinical assessment and preoperative and postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm scoring were used to followup patients who underwent revision intervention. RESULTS: Clinically, symptomatic revision rate was 5.9% (51 out of 856 patients), and 33 out of these 856 patients (3.9%) underwent revision ACL reconstruction. The reasons for revision were rupture of the previous graft in 21 and laxity (incompetence) of the graft in 12 patients. The mean preoperative and postoperative IKDC scores were 44.1 and 69.8, respectively, and the improvement was statistically significant (P < 0.001). The IKDC score following revision ACL reconstruction was significantly better in those patients who underwent revision <1 year following the onset of recurrent symptoms (P = 0.015). Meniscal tears were present in 47.6%, and chondral injuries were seen in 33.3% of patients. The tibial tunnel positioning was abnormal in 70% of patients. Femoral tunnel positioning was aberrant in all the patients. CONCLUSIONS: The revision rate of primary ACL reconstruction of 5.9% in nonathletes and revision ACL reconstruction rate of 3.9% are similar to the reported revision rates of 2.9%-5.8% in athletic patients. Similar to athletes, suboptimal tunnel placement is the major contributor to failure in nonathletes also.

Medial meniscal and chondral pathology at the time of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction results in inferior mid-term patient-reported outcomes.

PURPOSE: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are frequently not isolated injuries and damage to the menisci and articular cartilage surfaces is common. The concomitant presence of meniscal and chondral damage has the potential to influence patient outcomes following ACL reconstruction surgery and especially following revision ACL reconstruction where these findings are more common. However, study results regarding the mid-term outcome have been inconsistent. The purpose of this study was to compare mid-term patient-reported outcomes and return to sport in patients with and without meniscal and chondral pathology at the time of revision ACL reconstruction surgery. METHODS: A cohort of 180 patients (131 males, 49 female) with a mean age of 25.3 (SD 7.8) years participated at an average follow-up time of 4.6 (SD 1.3) years after revision ACL reconstruction surgery. All patients completed the IKDC Subjective, Marx Activity, KOOS-Quality of Life (QOL) and Single Numerical Assessment (SANE) scores. In addition, patients were asked to indicate the highest level of sport to which they had returned following their revision surgery. Any further injuries to either knee were also documented. Patients were grouped according to whether or not they had medial or lateral meniscal pathology at the time of revision surgery; and whether or not they had > 50% depth chondral damage (ICRS 3 or 4). All outcomes were compared between these groupings. RESULTS: Patients with medial meniscal pathology had significantly lower Marx, KOOS-QOL and SANE scores than patients without. There were no differences in any outcome score between patients with and without lateral meniscal pathology. Patients with ICRS 3 or 4 chondral pathology had significantly lower scores on all patient-reported outcomes as well as a lower rate of return to the same level of pre-injury sport. CONCLUSION: The presence of more severe chondral damage at the time of revision ACL reconstruction has a negative impact on functional outcomes, activity levels and return to sport rates. In addition, the presence of medial meniscal pathology was associated with significantly lower functional and quality of life scores than patients without pathology. These findings provide important clinically relevant data on the outcomes following revision ACL reconstruction with concomitant chondral and meniscal injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Subsequent Surgery After Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Rates and Risk Factors From a Multicenter Cohort.

BACKGROUND: While revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) can be performed to restore knee stability and improve patient activity levels, outcomes after this surgery are reported to be inferior to those after primary ACLR. Further reoperations after revision ACLR can have an even more profound effect on patient satisfaction and outcomes. However, there is a current lack of information regarding the rate and risk factors for subsequent surgery after revision ACLR. PURPOSE: To report the rate of reoperations, procedures performed, and risk factors for a reoperation 2 years after revision ACLR. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 1205 patients who underwent revision ACLR were enrolled in the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) between 2006 and 2011, composing the prospective cohort. Two-year questionnaire follow-up was obtained for 989 patients (82%), while telephone follow-up was obtained for 1112 patients (92%). If a patient reported having undergone subsequent surgery, operative reports detailing the subsequent procedure(s) were obtained and categorized. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to determine independent risk factors for a reoperation. RESULTS: Of the 1112 patients included in the analysis, 122 patients (11%) underwent a total of 172 subsequent procedures on the ipsilateral knee at 2-year follow-up. Of the reoperations, 27% were meniscal procedures (69% meniscectomy, 26% repair), 19% were subsequent revision ACLR, 17% were cartilage procedures (61% chondroplasty, 17% microfracture, 13% mosaicplasty), 11% were hardware removal, and 9% were procedures for arthrofibrosis. Multivariate analysis revealed that patients aged <20 years had twice the odds of patients aged 20 to 29 years to undergo a reoperation. The use of an allograft at the time of revision ACLR (odds ratio [OR], 1.79; P = .007) was a significant predictor for reoperations at 2 years, while staged revision (bone grafting of tunnels before revision ACLR) (OR, 1.93; P = .052) did not reach significance. Patients with grade 4 cartilage damage seen during revision ACLR were 78% less likely to undergo subsequent operations within 2 years. Sex, body mass index, smoking history, Marx activity score, technique for femoral tunnel placement, and meniscal tearing or meniscal treatment at the time of revision ACLR showed no significant effect on the reoperation rate. CONCLUSION: There was a significant reoperation rate after revision ACLR at 2 years (11%), with meniscal procedures most commonly involved. Independent risk factors for subsequent surgery on the ipsilateral knee included age <20 years and the use of allograft tissue at the time of revision ACLR.

Return to Play After Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in National Football League Players.

BACKGROUND: National Football League (NFL) players who undergo anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction have been shown to have a lower return to play (RTP) than previously expected. However, RTP in the NFL after revision ACL reconstruction (RACLR) is not well defined. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study is to determine the RTP of NFL players after RACLR and evaluate factors that predict RTP. Our hypothesis was that more experienced and established players would be more likely to RTP after RACLR. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 24 NFL players who underwent RACLR between 2007 and 2014 were reviewed and evaluated. Return to NFL play, time to return, seasons and games played prior to and after revision surgery, draft status, and demographic data were collected. Overall RTP was determined, and players who did RTP were compared with those unable to RTP. Data were also compared with control players matched for age, position, size, and experience. RESULTS: After RACLR, 79% (19/24) of NFL players returned to NFL regular-season play at an average of 12.6 months. All players who were drafted in the first 4 rounds, played in at least 55 games, or played 4 seasons of NFL play prior to injury were able to RTP. Players drafted in the first 4 rounds of the NFL draft were more likely to RTP than those who were not (odds ratio, 0.1; 95% CI, 0.01-1.00; P = .05). Those who returned to NFL play played in significantly less games and seasons after their injury than before (P = .01 and P = .01, respectively). However, these values did not differ when compared with matched controls (P = .67 and P = .33). CONCLUSION: NFL players who RTP after RACLR do so at a similar rate but prolonged time period compared with after primary ACL reconstruction. Athletes who were drafted in earlier rounds were more likely to RTP than those who were not. Additionally, player experience prior to injury is an important factor when predicting RTP after RACLR.

The long-term clinical and radiological outcomes in patients who suffer recurrent injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament after reconstruction.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term clinical and radiological outcome of patients who suffer recurrent injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) after reconstruction and require revision surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a consecutive series of 200 patients who underwent primary reconstruction following rupture of the ACL, we identified 36 who sustained a further rupture, 29 of whom underwent revision surgery. Patients were reviewed prospectively at one, two, seven, 15 and about 20 years after their original surgery. Primary outcome measures were the number of further ruptures, the posterior tibial slope (PTS), and functional and radiological outcomes. These were compared with a gender and age matched cohort of patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction only. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 18.3 years (14.3 to 20.2), 29 patients had undergone revision surgery and within this revision group 11 had sustained more than three ruptures of the ACL (3 to 6). The mean age at the time of revision reconstruction was 26.4 years (14 to 54). The mean PTS was significantly higher in those patients who suffered a further injury to the ACL (11°) compared with the control group (9°) (p < 0.001). The mean PTS in those patients who sustained more than three ruptures was 12°. CONCLUSION: Patients who suffer recurrent injuries to the ACL after reconstruction have poorer functional and radiological outcomes than those who suffer a single injury. The causes of further injury are likely to be multifactorial but an increased PTS appears to have a significant association with recurrent ACL injuries. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:337-43.

Revision single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with over-the-top route procedure.

PURPOSE: In revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), the single-stage technique and the over-the-top route (OTTR) procedure were usually selected for cases where the bone tunnel cannot be created at an anatomical position due to tunnel enlargement and overlap with the mal-positioned tunnel of primary reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical results of revision single-bundle ACL reconstruction using OTTR procedure and to compare the clinical results of OTTR procedure with those of anatomical single-bundle revision reconstruction (SBR). HYPOTHESIS: The results of OTTR procedure are equivalent to that of SBR. METHODS: Seventy-six revision ACL reconstruction knees from April 2002 to December 2012 were involved in our study. We focused on 21 knees which underwent surgery with SBR and 22 knees with OTTR using hamstring tendon. The clinical results were evaluated by means of the Lysholm score and the knee stability was assessed by the Lachman test, pivot-shift test and side-to-side difference by KT-2000 pre-operatively and after 1 year post-operatively. AP translation and rotational laxity using a navigation system were evaluated before and after revision ACL reconstruction under anesthesia in 8 cases of OTTR and in 6 cases of SBR. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between the OTTR and SBR regarding Lysholm score, Lachman test, pivot-shift test, ATT by KT-2000, and AP translation and rotational laxity with a navigation system. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical results of OTTR are almost equivalent to those of SBR. For the cases in which it is impossible to create the femoral tunnel in an anatomical position, OTTR is a valuable revision ACL reconstruction method. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Case-control study. Level III.