Purpose: Knee dislocation, although very rare, remains a devastating injury with many complications because of the complex nature of this trauma. The best treatment for knee dislocation is yet to be determined. The purposes of the study were to describe our surgical method, to report our results and to compare them with those of other surgical reconstruction techniques for knee dislocation.

Method: Fifty-six (56) patients with knee dislocation underwent acute combined reparation and reconstruction using Ligament Advancement Reinforcement System (LARS) artificial ligament. Patients were divided in three different groups according to the follow-up period. Group 1 (G1) included patients with a follow-up between two and six months post-op, group 2 (G2) involved patients with a follow-up between six months and twenty-four (24) months and group 3 (G3) was composed of patients who had a follow-up between twenty-four (24) and ninety-one (91) months.

Results: There was a significant difference between G1 and G3 for the Lysholm score and for the posterior stability at 90o of flexion measured with the Telos.

Conclusion: The subjective and objective findings from our series are satisfactory and comparable to the results of other series of knee dislocations. Our findings suggest that with a follow-up at seven years, acute combined reparation and reconstruction with LARS ligaments is a valid alternative for the treatment of knee dislocation.

Acute total knee dislocations are uncommon injuries for which some surgeons use artificial ligaments as their choice of graft for reconstruction. The goal of this study is to evaluate on a short and long term basis the stability and function of the LARS reconstructed knee. Flexion ROM was the only parameter which showed significant difference (p< 0.05) between subgroups. Therefore this treatment option for dislocated knee reconstruction seems to give good and lasting results even though patient’s quality of life may suffer.

Although a variety of options have been proposed for the treatment of knee dislocations, the optimal one remains controversial. Allografts and autografts have both been used for reconstruction of the cruciate ligaments. The purpose of this study is to evaluate acute reconstruction of both cruciate ligaments using Ligament Advanced Reinforced System (LARS) artificial ligaments.

We reviewed treatment of forty-eight acute knee dislocations. All patients had reconstruction of both cruciate ligaments with LARS ligaments. Patients were assed using SF-36, Lysholm and IKDC questionnaires as well as a physical exam. Stability of the reconstructed knee was evaluated radiologically using TELOS instrumentation. The controlateral knee was used as reference.

The forty-eight patients were subdivided into four groups of post-operative intervals ranging from six months to seven years. The average ROM was 120°of flexion and −1.4° of extension. The differential average TELOS for LCA, LCP at 30° and LCP at 90° were respectively 2.9 mm, 2.8 mm, 6.9 mm. and their average Lysholm, SF-36 and IKDC scores were 72.0, 72.5, 53.5. Statistical results showed no significant difference (p> 0.05) between subgroups in terms function, laxity and extension but did in flexion.

Our data show that patients treated by this method can regain a functional knee in terms of motion, stability and functional status and does not seem to deteriorate with time.

Knee reconstruction with artificial ligaments shows promising results at short and longer term even though it seems to affect quality of life in this population.

Financing: This study was partially financed by JK Orthomedic Inc.