Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 8 of 8
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 5 | Pages 474 - 480
1 May 2023
Inclan PM Brophy RH

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: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(5):474–480.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 12 | Pages 1043 - 1048
1 Dec 2021

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.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 89-B, Issue 8 | Pages 1051 - 1054
1 Aug 2007
Ohly NE Murray IR Keating JF

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% vs 24%, p < 0.01). No patient in the early group had advanced degenerative change, compared to 9.2% of patients in the delayed group. There was no significant difference (Mann-Whitney U-test, p = 0.3) in the incidence of meniscal tears between the two groups.

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.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 6 | Pages 714 - 723
1 Jun 2017
Grassi A Nitri M Moulton SG Marcheggiani Muccioli GM Bondi A Romagnoli M Zaffagnini S

Aims

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.

Materials and Methods

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.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 3 | Pages 337 - 343
1 Mar 2017
Ahmed I Salmon L Roe J Pinczewski L

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.


Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the preinjury functional scores with the postinjury preoperative score and postoperative outcome scores following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery (ACLR).

Methods

We performed a prospective study on patients who underwent primary ACLR by a single surgeon at a single centre between October 2010 and January 2018. Preoperative preinjury scores were collected at time of first assessment after the index injury. Preoperative (pre- and post-injury), one-year, and two-year postoperative functional outcomes were assessed by using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Lysholm Knee Score, and Tegner Activity Scale.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 11, Issue 2 | Pages 21 - 22
1 Apr 2022


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 5, Issue 5 | Pages 13 - 17
1 Oct 2016