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:
We reviewed 87 patients who underwent revision reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. The incidence of meniscal tears and degenerative change was assessed and related to the interval between failure of the primary graft and revision reconstruction. Patients were divided into two groups: early revision surgery within six months of graft failure, and delayed revision. Degenerative change was scored using the French Society of Arthroscopy system. There was a significantly higher incidence of articular cartilage degeneration in the delayed group (Mann-Whitney U-test, 53.2% We conclude that revision reconstruction should be carried out within six months of primary graft failure, in order to minimise the risk of degenerative change.
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
