Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft failure from rupture, attenuation, or malposition may cause recurrent subjective instability and objective laxity, and occurs in 3% to 22% of ACL reconstruction (ACLr) procedures. Revision ACLr is often indicated to restore knee stability, improve knee function, and facilitate return to cutting and pivoting activities. Prior to reconstruction, a thorough clinical and diagnostic evaluation is required to identify factors that may have predisposed an individual to recurrent ACL injury, appreciate concurrent intra-articular pathology, and select the optimal graft for revision reconstruction. Single-stage revision can be successful, although a staged approach may be used when optimal tunnel placement is not possible due to the position and/or widening of previous tunnels. Revision ACLr often involves concomitant procedures such as meniscal/chondral treatment, lateral extra-articular augmentation, and/or osteotomy. Although revision ACLr reliably restores knee stability and function, clinical outcomes and reoperation rates are worse than for primary ACLr. Cite this article:
Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery in children and the adolescent population has increased steadily over recent years. We used a national database to look at trends in ACL reconstruction and rates of serious complications, growth disturbance, and revision surgery, over 20 years. All hospital episodes for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction, under the age of 20 years, between 1 April 1997 and 31 March 2017, were extracted by procedure code from the national Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). Population standardized rates of intervention were determined by age group and year of treatment. Subsequent rates of serious complications including reoperation for infection, growth disturbance (osteotomy, epiphysiodesis), revision reconstruction, and/or contralateral ACL reconstruction rates were determined.Aims
Methods
To investigate the risk factors for progression of articular
cartilage damage after anatomical anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)
reconstruction. A total of 174 patients who underwent second-look arthroscopic
evaluation after anatomical ACL reconstruction were enrolled in
this study. The graded condition of the articular cartilage at the
time of ACL reconstruction was compared with that at second-look
arthroscopy. Age, gender, body mass index (BMI), ACL reconstruction
technique, meniscal conditions, and other variables were assessed
by regression analysis as risk factors for progression of damage
to the articular cartilage.Aims
Patients and Methods
Our aim was to perform a meta-analysis of the outcomes of revision
anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, comparing the use
of different types of graft. A search was performed of Medline and Pubmed using the terms
“Anterior Cruciate Ligament” and “ACL” combined with “revision”,
“re-operation” and “failure”. Only studies that reported the outcome
at a minimum follow-up of two years were included. Two authors reviewed
the papers, and outcomes were subdivided into autograft and allograft. Autograft
was subdivided into hamstring (HS) and bone-patellar tendon-bone
(BPTB). Subjective and objective outcome measures were analysed
and odds ratios with confidence intervals were calculated.Aims
Materials and Methods
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. 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.Aims
Patients and Methods
Purpose. Patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficiency and symptomatic medial compartment osteoarthritis (OA) present a challenge in management. These are often younger than typical primary OA patients and aspire to remain athletically active beyond simple ADLs. Combined ACL reconstruction and valgus tibial osteotomy (ACLHTO) is a well documented surgical option for patients deemed wither too young or too active for total knee arthroplasty. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is an established surgical treatment for symptomatic medial osteoarthritis of the knee refractory to conservative management. A commonly cited contraindications is symptomatic ACL deficiency because of previous reports detailing premature failure through loosening of the tibial component. Improved results and endoscopic ACL reconstructive procedures have led to an enticing concept of combining ACL reconstruction with medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (ACLUKR) for those ACL-deficient medial osteoarthritic (OA) knees. We sought to compare the outcomes in 2 cohorts of patients who underwent either ACLHTO or ACLUKR for this clinical problem. Method. Patients presenting with symptomatic bone on bone medial compartment OA and concomitant ACL deficiency (clinical or asymptomatic) were evaluated for surgery after exhausting non operative management. Patients who were under 40 or had plans to return to high impact loading sports and/or who had more moderate OA were offered combined ACL – medial opening wedge tibia osteotomy as a surgical procedure of choice. Patients were considered for combined ACL Oxford replacement if they were primarily seeking pain relief and were not engaged or aspiring to return to high impact or pivoting sports. All cases but one were concurrent ACL with either HTO or UKR with autogenous hamstring grafts used in all but 2 cases. Results. Thirty of 34 consecutive cases were available for follow-up for a rate of 88%. The median ages for 14 cases of ACLUKR was 51 (range 43 60) whereas 16 patients with ACLHTO had median age 43.4 (range 32 −59). Median FU was 4.65 yrs with minimum 2 year follow up (range 2–8.3). Three of the cases were
Purpose. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between generalised ligament laxity and requirement for revision ACL reconstruction. Materials and methods. 126 patients undergoing primary ACL reconstruction were included in the study along with 35 patients undergoing revision ACL surgery. 62 patients without any knee ligament injury formed an age and sex matched the control group. The Beighton score was used to quantify the ligamentous laxity in all cases with a score more than 4 classified as having generalised ligamentous laxity. The
Purpose: To investigate the validity of previous observations that meniscal repair has a better success rate when associated with ACL reconstruction. Methods and Results: The case notes of 170 patients who underwent meniscal repair between May 1999 and May 2007 were analysed for causes of re-operation and relation to status of the ACL. Mean age at the time of surgery was 28 years. 41 patients underwent re-operation at a mean time interval of 21 months (range 2 weeks - 87 months). 79 patients (Group A) had isolated meniscal tears. 44 patients (Group B) had meniscal repair at the same time as elective ACL reconstruction and underwent brace-free, accelerated rehabilitation. 47 patients (Group C) had meniscal repair in association with ACL disruption and underwent staged ligament reconstruction. In Group A, 23 patients underwent re-operation (Indications; meniscal symptoms 21, stiffness 1, infection 1). Nineteen repairs (23.8%) were found to have failed. In Group B, 15 patients underwent re-operation (Indications; meniscal symptoms 12, stiffness 1,
