Search

Background: Revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been documented to have inferior outcomes compared with primary ACL reconstruction. The reasons why remain unknown. Purpose: To determine whether surgical factors performed at the time of revision ACL reconstruction can influence a patient's outcome at 6-year follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction were identified and prospectively enrolled between 2006 and 2011. Data collected included baseline patient characteristics, surgical technique and pathology, and a series of validated patient-reported outcome instruments: Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective form, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Marx activity rating score. Patients were followed up for 6 years and asked to complete the identical set of outcome instruments. Regression analysis was used to control for baseline patient characteristics and surgical variables to assess the surgical risk factors for clinical outcomes 6 years after surgery. Results: A total of 1234 patients were enrolled (716 men, 58%; median age, 26 years), and 6-year follow-up was obtained on 79% of patients (980/1234). Using an interference screw for femoral fixation compared with a cross-pin resulted in significantly better outcomes in 6-year IKDC scores (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; 95% CI, 1.2-3.9; P =.008) and KOOS sports/recreation and quality of life subscale scores (OR range, 2.2-2.7; 95% CI, 1.2-4.8; P <.01). Use of an interference screw compared with a cross-pin resulted in a 2.6 times less likely chance of having a subsequent surgery within 6 years. Use of an interference screw for tibial fixation compared with any combination of tibial fixation techniques resulted in significantly improved scores for IKDC (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.3-2.9; P =.001); KOOS pain, activities of daily living, and sports/recreation subscales (OR range, 1.5-1.6; 95% CI, 1.0-2.4; P <.05); and WOMAC pain and activities of daily living subscales (OR range, 1.5-1.8; 95% CI, 1.0-2.7; P <.05). Use of a transtibial surgical approach compared with an anteromedial portal approach resulted in significantly improved KOOS pain and quality of life subscale scores at 6 years (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.02-2.2; P ≤.04). Conclusion: There are surgical variables at the time of ACL revision that can modify clinical outcomes at 6 years. Opting for a transtibial surgical approach and choosing an interference screw for femoral and tibial fixation improved patients' odds of having a significantly better 6-year clinical outcome in this cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anterior shoulder instability can result in bone loss of both the anterior glenoid and the posterior humerus. Bone loss has been shown to lead to increased failure postoperatively and may necessitate more complex surgical procedures, resulting in worse clinical outcomes and posttraumatic arthritis. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate predictors of glenoid and humeral head bone loss in patients undergoing surgery for anterior shoulder instability. It was hypothesized that male sex, contact sport participation, traumatic dislocation, and higher number of instability events would be associated with greater bone loss. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 892 patients with anterior shoulder instability were prospectively enrolled in the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability cohort. The presence and amount of anterior glenoid bone loss and accompanying Hill-Sachs lesions were quantified. Descriptive information and injury history were used to construct proportional odds models for the presence of any bone defect, for defects >10% of the anterior glenoid or humeral head, and for combined bony defects. Results: Anterior glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs lesions were present in 185 (20.7%) and 470 (52.7%) patients, respectively. Having an increased number of dislocations was associated with bone loss in all models. Increasing age, male sex, and non-White race were associated with anterior glenoid bone defects and Hill-Sachs lesions. Contact sport participation was associated with anterior glenoid bone loss, and Shoulder Actitvity Scale with glenoid bone loss >10%. A positive apprehension test was associated with Hill-Sachs lesions. Combined lesions were present in 19.4% of patients, and for every additional shoulder dislocation, the odds of having a combined lesion was 95% higher. Conclusion: An increasing number of preoperative shoulder dislocations is the factor most strongly associated with glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs lesions, and combined lesions. Early surgical stabilization before recurrence of instability may be the most effective method for preventing progression to clinically significant bone loss. Patients should be made aware of the expected course of shoulder instability, especially in athletes at high risk for recurrence and osseous defects, which may complicate care and worsen outcomes. Registration: NCT02075775 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Meniscal and chondral damage is common in the patient undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Purpose: To determine if meniscal and/or articular cartilage pathology at the time of revision ACL surgery significantly influences a patient's outcome at 6-year follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction were prospectively enrolled between 2006 and 2011. Data collection included baseline demographics, surgical technique, pathology, treatment, and scores from 4 validated patient-reported outcome instruments: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Marx Activity Rating Scale. Patients were followed up at 6 years and asked to complete the identical set of outcome instruments. Regression analysis assessed the meniscal and articular cartilage pathology risk factors for clinical outcomes 6 years after revision ACL reconstruction. Results: An overall 1234 patients were enrolled (716 males, 58%; median age, 26 years). Surgeons reported the pathology at the time of revision surgery in the medial meniscus (45%), lateral meniscus (36%), medial femoral condyle (43%), lateral femoral condyle (29%), medial tibial plateau (11%), lateral tibial plateau (17%), patella (30%), and trochlea (21%). Six-year follow-up was obtained on 79% of the sample (980/1234). Meniscal pathology and articular cartilage pathology (medial femoral condyle, lateral femoral condyle, lateral tibial plateau, trochlea, and patella) were significant drivers of poorer patient-reported outcomes at 6 years (IKDC, KOOS, WOMAC, and Marx). The most consistent factors driving outcomes were having a medial meniscal excision (either before or at the time of revision surgery) and patellofemoral articular cartilage pathology. Six-year Marx activity levels were negatively affected by having either a repair/excision of the medial meniscus (odds ratio range, 1.45-1.72; P ≤.04) or grade 3-4 patellar chondrosis (odds ratio, 1.72; P =.04). Meniscal pathology occurring before the index revision surgery negatively affected scores on all KOOS subscales except for sports/recreation (P <.05). Articular cartilage pathology significantly impaired all KOOS subscale scores (P <.05). Lower baseline outcome scores, higher body mass index, being a smoker, and incurring subsequent surgery all significantly increased the odds of reporting poorer clinical outcomes at 6 years. Conclusion: Meniscal and chondral pathology at the time of revision ACL reconstruction has continued significant detrimental effects on patient-reported outcomes at 6 years after revision surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision report lower outcome scores on validated knee questionnaires postoperatively compared to cohorts with primary ACL reconstruction. In a previously active population, it is unclear if patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are associated with a return to activity (RTA) or vary by sports participation level (higher level vs. recreational athletes). Hypotheses: Individual RTA would be associated with improved outcomes (ie, decreased knee symptoms, pain, function) as measured using validated PROs. Recreational participants would report lower PROs compared with higher level athletes and be less likely to RTA. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: There were 862 patients who underwent a revision ACL reconstruction (rACLR) and self-reported physical activity at any level preoperatively. Those who did not RTA reported no activity 2 years after revision. Baseline data included patient characteristics, surgical history and characteristics, and PROs: International Knee Documentation Committee questionnaire, Marx Activity Rating Scale, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. A binary indicator was used to identify patients with same/better PROs versus worse outcomes compared with baseline, quantifying the magnitude of change in each direction, respectively. Multivariable regression models were used to evaluate risk factors for not returning to activity, the association of 2-year PROs after rACLR surgery by RTA status, and whether each PRO and RTA status differed by participation level. Results: At 2 years postoperatively, approximately 15% did not RTA, with current smokers (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.3; P =.001), female patients (aOR = 2.9; P <.001), recreational participants (aOR = 2.0; P =.016), and those with a previous medial meniscal excision (aOR = 1.9; P =.013) having higher odds of not returning. In multivariate models, not returning to activity was significantly associated with having worse PROs at 2 years; however, no clinically meaningful differences in PROs at 2 years were seen between participation levels. Conclusion: Recreational-level participants were twice as likely to not RTA compared with those participating at higher levels. Within a previously active cohort, no RTA was a significant predictor of lower PROs after rACLR. However, among patients who did RTA after rACLR, approximately 20% reported lower outcome scores. Most patients with rACLR who were active at baseline improved over time; however, patients who reported worse outcomes at 2 years had a clinically meaningful decline across all PROs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery have been shown to have elevated activity levels. Factors associated with shoulder activity in this patient population at baseline and after surgery are unknown. Hypothesis: Patient-specific variables are associated with shoulder activity level at baseline and at 2-year follow-up in a cohort of patients undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery were prospectively enrolled. As part of the data collection process, patients completed a previously validated Shoulder Activity Scale. A regression analysis was performed to assess the association of patient characteristics with baseline and 2-year follow-up shoulder activity levels. Results: A total of 764 (n = 612 men, n = 152 women) out of 957 patients (80%) undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery with a median age of 25 years had baseline and 2-year follow-up data and were included in the current analysis. The baseline shoulder activity level was associated with race (P <.0001) and preoperative duration of instability (P <.0001). At 2 years, 52% of the cohort had returned to the same or higher activity level after surgery. Predictors of higher shoulder activity level at 2-year follow-up included higher baseline activity level (P <.0001), male sex (P <.0001), younger age (P =.004), higher body mass index (BMI) (P =.03), more dislocations (P =.03), nonsmokers (P =.04), and race (P =.04). Conclusion: A longer duration of preoperative symptoms was associated with a lower baseline activity in this cohort. High baseline preoperative shoulder activity, younger age, male sex, higher BMI, number of dislocations, and nonsmoking status predicted higher shoulder activity 2 years after shoulder stabilization surgery. Registration: NCT02075775 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Articular cartilage and meniscal damage are commonly encountered and often treated at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Our understanding of how these injuries and their treatment relate to outcomes of ACLR is still evolving. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess whether articular cartilage and meniscal variables are predictive of 10-year outcomes after ACLR. We hypothesized that articular cartilage lesions and meniscal tears and treatment would be predictors of the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) (all 5 subscales), and Marx activity level outcomes at 10-year follow-up after ACLR. Study Design: Cohort study (prognosis); Level of evidence, 1. Methods: Between 2002 and 2008, individuals with ACLR were prospectively enrolled and followed longitudinally using the IKDC, KOOS, and Marx activity score completed at entry, 2, 6, and 10 years. A proportional odds logistic regression model was built incorporating variables from patient characteristics, surgical technique, articular cartilage injuries, and meniscal tears and treatment to determine the predictors (risk factors) of IKDC, KOOS, and Marx outcomes at 10 years. Results: A total of 3273 patients were enrolled (56% male; median age, 23 years at time of enrollment). Ten-year follow-up was obtained on 79% (2575/3273) of the cohort. Incidence of concomitant pathology at the time of surgery consisted of the following: articular cartilage (medial femoral condyle [MFC], 22%; lateral femoral condyle [LFC], 15%; medial tibial plateau [MTP], 4%; lateral tibial plateau [LTP], 11%; patella, 18%; trochlea, 8%) and meniscal pathology (medial, 37%; lateral, 46%). Variables that were predictive of poorer 10-year outcomes included articular cartilage damage in the patellofemoral (P <.01) and medial (P <.05) compartments and previous medial meniscal surgery (7% of knees; P <.04). Compared with no meniscal tear, a meniscal injury was not associated with 10-year outcomes. Medial meniscal repair at the time of ACLR was associated with worse 10-year outcomes for 2 of 5 KOOS subscales, while a medial meniscal repair in knees with grade 2 MFC chondrosis was associated with better outcomes on 2 KOOS subscales. Conclusion: Articular cartilage injury in the patellofemoral and medial compartments at the time of ACLR and a history of medial meniscal surgery before ACLR were associated with poorer 10-year ACLR patient-reported outcomes, but meniscal injury present at the time of ACLR was not. There was limited and conflicting association of medial meniscal repair with these outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although graft choice may be limited in the revision setting based on previously used grafts, most surgeons believe that graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is an important factor related to outcome. Hypothesis: In the ACL revision setting, there would be no difference between autograft and allograft in rerupture rate and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 6-year follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients who had revision surgery were identified and prospectively enrolled in this cohort study by 83 surgeons over 52 sites. Data collected included baseline characteristics, surgical technique and pathology, and a series of validated PRO measures. Patients were followed up at 6 years and asked to complete the identical set of PRO instruments. Incidence of additional surgery and reoperation because of graft failure were also recorded. Multivariable regression models were used to determine the predictors (risk factors) of PROs, graft rerupture, and reoperation at 6 years after revision surgery. Results: A total of 1234 patients including 716 (58%) men were enrolled. A total of 325 (26%) underwent revision using a bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) autograft; 251 (20%), soft tissue autograft; 289 (23%), BTB allograft; 302 (25%), soft tissue allograft; and 67 (5%), other graft. Questionnaires and telephone follow-up for subsequent surgery information were obtained for 809 (66%) patients, while telephone follow-up was only obtained for an additional 128 patients for the total follow-up on 949 (77%) patients. Graft choice was a significant predictor of 6-year Marx Activity Rating Scale scores (P =.024). Specifically, patients who received a BTB autograft for revision reconstruction had higher activity levels than did patients who received a BTB allograft (odds ratio [OR], 1.92; 95% CI, 1.25-2.94). Graft rerupture was reported in 5.8% (55/949) of patients by their 6-year follow-up: 3.5% (16/455) of patients with autografts and 8.4% (37/441) of patients with allografts. Use of a BTB autograft for revision resulted in patients being 4.2 times less likely to sustain a subsequent graft rupture than if a BTB allograft were utilized (P =.011; 95% CI, 1.56-11.27). No significant differences were found in graft rerupture rates between BTB autograft and soft tissue autografts (P =.87) or between BTB autografts and soft tissue allografts (P =.36). Use of an autograft was found to be a significant predictor of having fewer reoperations within 6 years compared with using an allograft (P =.010; OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36-0.87). Conclusion: BTB and soft tissue autografts had a decreased risk in graft rerupture compared with BTB allografts. BTB autografts were associated with higher activity level than were BTB allografts at 6 years after revision reconstruction. Surgeons and patients should consider this information when choosing a graft for revision ACL reconstruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A primary goal of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is to reduce pathologically increased anterior and rotational laxity of the knee, but the effects of residual laxity on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after ACLR remain unclear. Hypothesis: Increased residual laxity at 2 years postoperatively is predictive of a higher risk of subsequent ipsilateral knee surgery and decreases in PRO scores from 2 to 6 years after surgery. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: From a prospective multicenter cohort, 433 patients aged <36 years were identified at a minimum 2 years after primary ACLR. These patients underwent a KT-1000 arthrometer assessment and pivot-shift test and completed PRO assessments with the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores. Patients completed the same PROs at 6 years postoperatively, and any subsequent ipsilateral knee procedures during this period were recorded. Subsequent surgery risk and change in PROs from 2 to 6 years postoperatively were compared based on residual side-to-side KT-1000 arthrometer differences (<−1 mm, −1 to 2 mm, 2 to 6 mm, and >6 mm) in laxity at 2 years postoperatively. Multiple linear regression models were built to determine the relationship between 2-year postoperative knee laxity and 2- to 6-year change in PROs while controlling for age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, meniscal and cartilage status, and graft type. Results: A total of 381 patients (87.9%) were available for follow-up 6 years postoperatively. There were no significant differences in risk of subsequent knee surgery based on residual knee laxity. Patients with a difference >6 mm in side-to-side anterior laxity at 2 years postoperatively were noted to have a larger decrease in PROs from 2 to 6 years postoperatively (P <.05). No significant differences in any PROs were noted among patients with a difference <6 mm in side-to-side anterior laxity or those with pivot glide (IKDC B) versus no pivot shift (IKDC A). Conclusion: The presence of a residual side-to-side KT-1000 arthrometer difference <6 mm or pivot glide at 2 years after ACLR is not associated with an increased risk of subsequent ipsilateral knee surgery or decreased PROs up to 6 years after ACLR. Conversely, patients exhibiting a difference >6 mm in side-to-side anterior laxity were noted to have significantly decreased PROs at 6 years after ACLR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Meniscal preservation has been demonstrated to contribute to long-term knee health. This has been a successful intervention in patients with isolated tears and tears associated with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, the results of meniscal repair in the setting of revision ACL reconstruction have not been documented. Purpose: To examine the prevalence and 2-year operative success rate of meniscal repairs in the revision ACL setting. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All cases of revision ACL reconstruction with concomitant meniscal repair from a multicenter group between 2006 and 2011 were selected. Two-year follow-up was obtained by phone and email to determine whether any subsequent surgery had occurred to either knee since the initial revision ACL reconstruction. If so, operative reports were obtained, whenever possible, to verify the pathologic condition and subsequent treatment. Results: In total, 218 patients (18%) from 1205 revision ACL reconstructions underwent concurrent meniscal repairs. There were 235 repairs performed: 153 medial, 48 lateral, and 17 medial and lateral. The majority of these repairs (n = 178; 76%) were performed with all-inside techniques. Two-year surgical follow-up was obtained on 90% (197/218) of the cohort. Overall, the meniscal repair failure rate was 8.6% (17/197) at 2 years. Of the 17 failures, 15 were medial (13 all-inside, 2 inside-out) and 2 were lateral (both all-inside). Four medial failures were treated in conjunction with a subsequent repeat revision ACL reconstruction. Conclusion: Meniscal repair in the revision ACL reconstruction setting does not have a high failure rate at 2-year follow-up. Failure rates for medial and lateral repairs were both <10% and consistent with success rates of primary ACL reconstruction meniscal repair. Medial tears underwent reoperation for failure at a significantly higher rate than lateral tears. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The cause of subsequent surgery after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction varies, but if risk factors for specific subsequent surgical procedures can be identified, we can better understand which patients are at greatest risk. Purpose: To report the incidence and types of subsequent surgery that occurred in a cohort of patients 6 years after their index ACL reconstruction and to identify which variables were associated with the incidence of patients undergoing subsequent surgery after their index ACL reconstruction. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients completed a questionnaire before their index ACL surgery and were followed up at 2 and 6 years. Patients were contacted to determine whether any underwent additional surgery since baseline. Operative reports were obtained, and all surgical procedures were categorized and recorded. Logistic regression models were constructed to predict which patient demographic and surgical variables were associated with the incidence of undergoing subsequent surgery after their index ACL reconstruction. Results: The cohort consisted of 3276 patients (56.3% male) with a median age of 23 years. A 6-year follow-up was obtained on 91.5% (2999/3276) with regard to information on the incidence and frequency of subsequent surgery. Overall, 20.4% (612/2999) of the cohort was documented to have undergone at least 1 subsequent surgery on the ipsilateral knee 6 years after their index ACL reconstruction. The most common subsequent surgical procedures were related to the meniscus (11.9%), revision ACL reconstruction (7.5%), loss of motion (7.8%), and articular cartilage (6.7%). Significant risk factors for incurring subsequent meniscus-related surgery were having a medial meniscal repair at the time of index surgery, reconstruction with a hamstring autograft or allograft, higher baseline Marx activity level, younger age, and cessation of smoking. Significant predictors of undergoing subsequent surgery involving articular cartilage were higher body mass index, higher Marx activity level, reconstruction with a hamstring autograft or allograft, meniscal repair at the time of index surgery, or a grade 3/4 articular cartilage abnormality classified at the time of index ACL reconstruction. Risk factors for incurring subsequent surgery for loss of motion were younger age, female sex, low baseline Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score symptom subscore, and reconstruction with a soft tissue allograft. Conclusion: These findings can be used to identify patients who are at the greatest risk of incurring subsequent surgery after ACL reconstruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Physicians' and patients' decision-making process between bone–patellar tendon–bone (BTB) and hamstring tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) may be influenced by a variety of factors in the young, active athlete. Purpose: To determine the incidence of both ACL graft revisions and contralateral ACL tears resulting in subsequent ACLR in a cohort of high school– and college-aged athletes who initially underwent primary ACLR with either a BTB or a hamstring autograft. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Study inclusion criteria were patients aged 14 to 22 years who were injured in sports, had a contralateral normal knee, and were scheduled to undergo unilateral primary ACLR with either a BTB or a hamstring autograft. All patients were prospectively followed for 6 years to determine whether any subsequent ACLR was performed in either knee after their initial ACLR. Multivariable regression modeling controlled for age, sex, ethnicity/race, body mass index, sport and competition level, baseline activity level, knee laxity, and graft type. The 6-year outcomes were the incidence of subsequent ACLR in either knee. Results: A total of 839 patients were eligible, of which 770 (92%) had 6-year follow-up for the primary outcome measure of the incidence of subsequent ACLR. The median age was 17 years, with 48% female, and the distribution of BTB and hamstring grafts was 492 (64%) and 278 (36%), respectively. The incidence of subsequent ACLR at 6 years was 9.2% in the ipsilateral knee, 11.2% in the contralateral normal knee, and 19.7% for either knee. High-grade preoperative knee laxity (odds ratio [OR], 2.4 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-3.9]; P =.001), autograft type (OR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.3-3.5]; P =.004), and age (OR, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.7-1.0]; P =.009) were the 3 most influential predictors of ACL graft revision in the ipsilateral knee. The odds of ACL graft revision were 2.1 times higher for patients receiving a hamstring autograft than patients receiving a BTB autograft (95% CI, 1.3-3.5; P =.004). No significant differences were found between autograft choices when looking at the incidence of subsequent ACLR in the contralateral knee. Conclusion: There was a high incidence of both ACL graft revisions and contralateral normal ACL tears resulting in subsequent ACLR in this young athletic cohort. The incidence of ACL graft revision at 6 years after index surgery was 2.1 times higher with a hamstring autograft compared with a BTB autograft. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Understanding the risk factors for loss to follow-up in prospective clinical studies may allow for a targeted approach to minimizing follow-up bias and improving the generalizability of conclusions in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and other sports-related interventions. Purpose: To identify independent risk factors associated with failure to complete (ie, loss to follow-up) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at 2 years after ACLR within a well-funded prospective longitudinal cohort. Study Design: Cohort study (prognosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: All patients undergoing primary or revision ACLR enrolled in the prospectively collected database of the multicenter consortium between 2002 and 2008 were included. Multivariate regression analyses were conducted to determine which baseline risk factors were significantly associated with loss to follow-up at a minimum of 2 years after surgery. Predictors assessed for loss to follow-up were as follows: consortium site, sex, race, marital status, smoking status, phone number provided (home or cell), email address provided (primary or secondary), years of school completed, average hours worked per week, working status (full-time, part-time, homemaker, retired, student, or disabled), number of people living at home, and preoperative PROMs (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Marx Activity Rating Scale, and International Knee Documentation Committee). Results: A total of 3202 patients who underwent ACLR were enrolled. The 2-year PROM follow-up rate for this cohort was 88% (2821 of 3202). Multivariate analyses showed that patient sex (male: odds ratio [OR], 1.80) and race (black: OR, 3.64; other nonwhite: OR, 1.81) were independent predictors of 2-year loss to follow-up of PROMs. Education level was a nonconfounder. Conclusion: While education level did not predict loss to follow-up, patients who are male and nonwhite are at increased risk of loss to follow-up of PROM at 2 years. Capturing patient outcomes with minimal loss depends on equitable, not equal, opportunity to maximize generalizability and mitigate potential population-level health disparities. Registration: NCT00478894 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a valid measure of results after revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Revision ACL reconstruction has been documented to have worse outcomes when compared with primary ACL reconstruction. Understanding positive and negative predictors of PROs will allow surgeons to modify and potentially improve outcome for patients. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to describe PROs after revision ACL reconstruction and test the hypothesis that patient- and technique-specific variables are associated with these outcomes. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction were identified and prospectively enrolled by 83 surgeons over 52 sites. Data included baseline demographics, surgical technique and pathology, and a series of validated PRO 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. Patients were followed up at 2 years and asked to complete the identical set of outcome instruments. Multivariate regression models were used to control for a variety of demographic and surgical factors to determine the positive and negative predictors of PRO scores at 2 years after revision surgery. Results: A total of 1205 patients met the inclusion criteria and were successfully enrolled: 697 (58%) were male, with a median cohort age of 26 years. The median time since their most recent previous ACL reconstruction was 3.4 years. Two-year questionnaire follow-up was obtained from 989 patients (82%). The most significant positive predictors of 2-year IKDC scores were a high baseline IKDC score, high baseline Marx activity level, male sex, and having a longer time since the most recent previous ACL reconstruction, while negative predictors included having a lateral meniscectomy before the revision ACL reconstruction or having grade 3/4 chondrosis in either the trochlear groove or the medial tibial plateau at the time of the revision surgery. For KOOS, having a high baseline score and having a longer time between the most recent previous ACL reconstruction and revision surgery were significant positive predictors for having a better (ie, higher) 2-year KOOS, while having a lateral meniscectomy before the revision ACL reconstruction was a consistent predictor for having a significantly worse (ie, lower) 2-year KOOS. Statistically significant positive predictors for 2-year Marx activity levels included higher baseline Marx activity levels, younger age, male sex, and being a nonsmoker. Negative 2-year activity level predictors included having an allograft or a biologic enhancement at the time of revision surgery. Conclusion: PROs after revision ACL reconstruction are associated with a variety of patient- and surgeon-related variables. Understanding positive and negative predictors of PROs will allow surgeons to guide patient expectations as well as potentially improve outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While a primary goal of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is to reduce pathologically increased anterior and rotational knee laxity, the relationship between knee laxity after ACL reconstruction and patient-reported knee function remains unclear. Hypothesis: There would be no significant correlation between the degree of residual anterior and rotational knee laxity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) 2 years after primary ACL reconstruction. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: From a prospective multicenter nested cohort of patients, 433 patients younger than 36 years of age injured in sports with no history of concomitant ligament surgery, revision ACL surgery, or surgery of the contralateral knee were identified and evaluated at a minimum 2 years after primary ACL reconstruction. Each patient underwent Lachman and pivot-shift evaluation as well as a KT-1000 arthrometer assessment along with Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores. A proportional odds logistic regression model was used to predict each 2-year PRO score, controlling for preoperative score, age, sex, body mass index, smoking, Marx activity score, education, subsequent surgery, meniscal and cartilage status, graft type, and range of motion asymmetry. Measures of knee laxity were independently added to each model to determine correlation with PROs. Results: Side-to-side manual Lachman differences were IKDC A in 246 (57%) patients, IKDC B in 183 (42%) patients, and IKDC C in 4 (<1%) patients. Pivot-shift was classified as IKDC A in 209 (48%) patients, IKDC B in 183 (42%) patients, and IKDC C in 11 (2.5%) patients. The mean side-to-side KT-1000 difference was 2.0 ± 2.6 mm. No significant correlations were noted between pivot-shift or anterior tibial translation as assessed by Lachman or KT-1000 and any PRO. All predicted differences in PROs based on IKDC A versus B pivot-shift and anterior tibial translation were less than 4 points. Conclusion: Neither the presence of IKDC A versus B pivot-shift nor increased anterior tibial translation of up to 6 mm is associated with clinically relevant decreases in PROs 2 years after ACL reconstruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision cohorts continually report lower outcome scores on validated knee questionnaires than primary ACL cohorts at similar time points after surgery. It is unclear how these outcomes are associated with physical activity after physician clearance for return to recreational or competitive sports after ACL revision surgery. Hypotheses: Participants who return to either multiple sports or a singular sport after revision ACL surgery will report decreased knee symptoms, increased activity level, and improved knee function as measured by validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and compared with no sports participation. Multisport participation as compared with singular sport participation will result in similar increased PROMs and activity level. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 1205 patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction were enrolled by 83 surgeons at 52 clinical sites. At the time of revision, baseline data collected included the following: demographics, surgical characteristics, previous knee treatment and PROMs, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) questionnaire, Marx activity score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). A series of multivariate regression models were used to evaluate the association of IKDC, KOOS, WOMAC, and Marx Activity Rating Scale scores at 2 years after revision surgery by sports participation category, controlling for known significant covariates. Results: Two-year follow-up was obtained on 82% (986 of 1205) of the original cohort. Patients who reported not participating in sports after revision surgery had lower median PROMs both at baseline and at 2 years as compared with patients who participated in either a single sport or multiple sports. Significant differences were found in the change of scores among groups on the IKDC (P <.0001), KOOS-Symptoms (P =.01), KOOS–Sports and Recreation (P =.04), and KOOS–Quality of Life (P <.0001). Patients with no sports participation were 2.0 to 5.7 times more likely than multiple-sport participants to report significantly lower PROMs, depending on the specific outcome measure assessed, and 1.8 to 3.8 times more likely than single-sport participants (except for WOMAC-Stiffness, P =.18), after controlling for known covariates. Conclusion: Participation in either a single sport or multiple sports in the 2 years after ACL revision surgery was found to be significantly associated with higher PROMs across multiple validated self-reported assessment tools. During follow-up appointments, surgeons should continue to expect that patients who report returning to physical activity after surgery will self-report better functional outcomes, regardless of baseline activity levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The occurrence of physiologic knee hyperextension (HE) in the revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) population and its effect on outcomes have yet to be reported. Hypothesis/Purpose: The prevalence of knee HE in revision ACLR and its effect on 2-year outcome were studied with the hypothesis that preoperative physiologic knee HE ≥5° is a risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft rupture. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients undergoing revision ACLR were identified and prospectively enrolled between 2006 and 2011. Study inclusion criteria were patients undergoing single-bundle graft reconstructions. Patients were followed up at 2 years and asked to complete an identical set of outcome instruments (International Knee Documentation Committee, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, WOMAC, and Marx Activity Rating Scale) as well as provide information regarding revision ACL graft failure. A regression model with graft failure as the dependent variable included age, sex, graft type at the time of the revision ACL surgery, and physiologic preoperative passive HE ≥5° (yes/no) to assess these as potential risk factors for clinical outcomes 2 years after revision ACLR. Results: Analyses included 1145 patients, for whom 2-year follow-up was attained for 91%. The median age was 26 years, with age being a continuous variable. Those below the median were grouped as “younger” and those above as “older” (age: interquartile range = 20, 35 years), and 42% of patients were female. There were 50% autografts, 48% allografts, and 2% that had a combination of autograft plus allograft. Passive knee HE ≥5° was present in 374 (33%) patients in the revision cohort, with 52% being female. Graft rupture at 2-year follow-up occurred in 34 cases in the entire cohort, of which 12 were in the HE ≥5° group (3.2% failure rate) and 22 in the non-HE group (2.9% failure rate). The median age of patients who failed was 19 years, as opposed to 26 years for those with intact grafts. Three variables in the regression model were significant predictors of graft failure: younger age (odds ratio [OR] = 3.6; 95% CI, 1.6-7.9; P = .002), use of allograft (OR = 3.3; 95% CI, 1.5-7.4; P = .003), and HE ≥5° (OR = 2.12; 95% CI, 1.1-4.7; P = .03). Conclusion: This study revealed that preoperative physiologic passive knee HE ≥5° is present in one-third of patients who undergo revision ACLR. HE ≥5° was an independent significant predictor of graft failure after revision ACLR with a >2-fold OR of subsequent graft rupture in revision ACL surgery. Registration: NCT00625885 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Knee laxity in the setting of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is often assessed through physical examination using the Lachman, pivot shift, and anterior drawer tests. The degree of laxity noted on these examinations may influence treatment decisions and prognosis. Hypothesis: Increased preoperative knee laxity is associated with increased risk of revision ACL reconstruction, increased risk of contralateral ACL reconstruction, and poorer patient-reported outcomes at 6 years postoperatively. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: 2333 patients who underwent primary isolated ACL reconstruction without additional ligament injury were identified. Patients reported by the operating surgeons to have an International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) grade D Lachman, anterior drawer, or pivot shift examination were classified as having a high-grade laxity. Multiple logistic regression models were used to evaluate whether having high-grade preoperative laxity was predictive of increased odds of undergoing subsequent revision or contralateral ACL reconstruction within 6 years of the index procedure, controlling for patient age, sex, body mass index, Marx activity level, sport, graft type, medial meniscal treatment, and lateral meniscal treatment. Multiple linear regression modeling was used to evaluate whether having high-grade preoperative laxity was predictive of poorer IKDC or Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Knee-Related Quality of Life (KOOS-QOL) scores at 6 years postoperatively, after controlling for baseline score, patient age, ethnicity, sex, body mass index, marital status, smoking status, sport participation, competition level, Marx activity rating score, graft type, and articular cartilage and meniscal status. Results: In total, 743 of 2325 patients (32.0%) were noted to have high-grade laxity on at least 1 physical examination test. High-grade Lachman was noted in 334 patients (14.4%), high-grade pivot shift was noted in 617 patients (26.5%), and high-grade anterior drawer was noted in 233 patients (10.0%). Six-year revision and contralateral ACL reconstruction data were available for 2129 patients (91.6%). High-grade prereconstruction Lachman was associated with significantly increased odds of ACL graft revision (odds ratio [OR], 1.76; 95% CI, 1.10-2.80, P = .02) and contralateral ACL reconstruction (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.09-2.69; P = .019). High-grade prereconstruction pivot shift was associated with significantly increased odds of ACL graft revision (OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.19-2.54, P = .002) but not with significantly increased odds of contralateral ACL reconstruction (OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.89-1.87; P = .16). High-grade prereconstruction laxity was associated with statistically significantly lower 6-year IKDC (β = −2.26, P = .003), KOOS-QOL (β = −2.67, P = .015), and Marx activity scores (β = −0.54, P = .020), but these differences did not approach clinically relevant differences in patient-reported outcomes. Conclusion: High-grade preoperative knee laxity is predictive of increased odds of revision ACL reconstruction and contralateral ACL reconstruction 6 years after ACL reconstruction. Poorer patient-reported outcome scores in the high-grade laxity group were also noted, but the difference did not reach a level of clinical relevance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) has demonstrated inferior psychometric properties when compared with the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form when assessing outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The KOOS, Joint Replacement (KOOS, JR) is a validated short-form instrument to assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after knee arthroplasty, and the purpose of this study was to determine if augmenting the KOOS, JR with additional KOOS items would allow for the creation of a short-form KOOS-based global knee score for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction, with psychometric properties similar to those of the IKDC. Hypothesis: An augmented version of the KOOS, JR could be created that would demonstrate convergent validity with the IKDC but avoid the ceiling effects and limitations previously noted with several of the KOOS subscales. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Based on preoperative and 2-year postoperative responses to the KOOS questionnaires from a sample of 1904 patients undergoing ACL reconstruction, an aggregate score combining the KOOS, JR and the 4 KOOS Quality of Life subscale questions, termed the KOOSglobal, was developed. Psychometric properties of the KOOSglobal were then compared with those of the IKDC subjective score. Convergent validity between the KOOSglobal and IKDC was assessed with a Spearman correlation (ρ). Responsiveness of the 2 instruments was assessed by calculating the pre- to postoperative effect size and relative efficiency. Finally, the presence of a preoperative floor or postoperative ceiling effect was defined with the threshold of 15% of patients reporting either the worst possible (0 for KOOSglobal and IKDC) or the best possible (100 for KOOSglobal and IKDC) scores, respectively. Results: The newly developed KOOSglobal was responsive after ACL reconstruction and demonstrated convergent validity with the IKDC. The KOOSglobal significantly correlated with the IKDC scores (ρ = 0.91, P < .001), explained 83% of the variability in IKDC scores, and was similarly responsive (relative efficiency = 0.63). While there was a higher rate of perfect postoperative scores with the KOOSglobal (213 of 1904, 11%) than with the IKDC (6%), the KOOSglobal was still below the 15% ceiling effect threshold. Conclusion: The large ceiling effects limit the ability to use several of the KOOS subscales with the younger, more active ACL population. However, by creating an aggregate score from the KOOS, JR and 4 KOOS Quality of Life subscale questions, the 11-item KOOSglobal offers a responsive PRO tool after ACL reconstruction that converges with the information captured with the IKDC. Also, by offering the ability to calculate multiple scores from a single questionnaire, the KOOSglobal may provide the orthopaedic community a single PRO platform to be used across knee-related subspecialties. Registration: NCT00478894 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction can effectively return athletes to the playing field, but they are still at risk of developing posttraumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA). No studies have used multivariable analysis to evaluate the predictors of radiographic PTOA in the lateral compartment of the knee at short-term follow-up after ACL reconstruction. Purpose: To determine the predictors of radiographic joint space narrowing in the lateral compartment 2 to 3 years after ACL reconstruction in a young, active cohort. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A nested cohort of 358 patients from the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) prospective cohort who were aged ≤33 years, were injured playing a sport, and had never undergone surgery on the contralateral knee were followed up 2 years after ACL reconstruction with questionnaires and with weightbearing knee radiographs using the metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint technique. The joint space width in the lateral compartment was measured using a semiautomatic computerized method, and multivariable predictive modeling was used to evaluate the relationship between meniscus treatment, cartilage injury, graft type, and joint space while adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, and Marx activity score. Results: The mean lateral joint space width was 0.11 mm narrower on the ACL-reconstructed knee compared with the contralateral healthy knee (7.69 mm vs 7.80 mm, respectively; P < .01). Statistically significant predictors of a narrower joint space width on the ACL-reconstructed knee included lateral meniscectomy (P < .001) and a Marx activity score less than 16 points (P < .001). Conclusion: This study identifies lateral meniscectomy and a lower baseline Marx activity score to be predictors of radiographic joint space narrowing in the lateral compartment 2 to 3 years after ACL reconstruction in young, active patients without a prior knee injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The long-term prognosis and risk factors for quality of life and disability after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remain unknown. Hypothesis/Purpose: Our objective was to identify patient-reported outcomes and patient-specific risk factors from a large prospective cohort at a minimum 10-year follow-up after ACL reconstruction. We hypothesized that meniscus and articular cartilage injuries, revision ACL reconstruction, subsequent knee surgery, and certain demographic characteristics would be significant risk factors for inferior outcomes at 10 years. Study Design: Therapeutic study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Unilateral ACL reconstruction procedures were identified and prospectively enrolled between 2002 and 2004 from 7 sites in the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON). Patients preoperatively completed a series of validated outcome instruments, including the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Marx activity rating scale. At the time of surgery, physicians documented all intra-articular abnormalities, treatment, and surgical techniques utilized. Patients were followed at 2, 6, and 10 years postoperatively and asked to complete the same outcome instruments that they completed at baseline. The incidence and details of any subsequent knee surgeries were also obtained. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify significant predictors of the outcome. Results: A total of 1592 patients were enrolled (57% male; median age, 24 years). Ten-year follow-up was obtained on 83% (n = 1320) of the cohort. Both IKDC and KOOS scores significantly improved at 2 years and were maintained at 6 and 10 years. Conversely, Marx scores dropped markedly over time, from a median score of 12 points at baseline to 9 points at 2 years, 7 points at 6 years, and 6 points at 10 years. The patient-specific risk factors for inferior 10-year outcomes were lower baseline scores; higher body mass index; being a smoker at baseline; having a medial or lateral meniscus procedure performed before index ACL reconstruction; undergoing revision ACL reconstruction; undergoing lateral meniscectomy; grade 3 to 4 articular cartilage lesions in the medial, lateral, or patellofemoral compartments; and undergoing any subsequent ipsilateral knee surgery after index ACL reconstruction. Conclusion: Patients were able to perform sports-related functions and maintain a relatively high knee-related quality of life 10 years after ACL reconstruction, although activity levels significantly declined over time. Multivariable analysis identified several key modifiable risk factors that significantly influence the outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Articular cartilage health is an important issue following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury and primary ACL reconstruction. Factors present at the time of primary ACL reconstruction may influence the subsequent progression of articular cartilage damage. Hypothesis: Larger meniscus resection at primary ACL reconstruction, increased patient age, and increased body mass index (BMI) are associated with increased odds of worsened articular cartilage damage at the time of revision ACL reconstruction. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Subjects who had primary and revision data in the databases of the Multicenter Orthopaedics Outcomes Network (MOON) and Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) were included. Reviewed data included chondral surface status at the time of primary and revision surgery, meniscus status at the time of primary reconstruction, primary reconstruction graft type, time from primary to revision ACL surgery, as well as demographics and Marx activity score at the time of revision. Significant progression of articular cartilage damage was defined in each compartment according to progression on the modified Outerbridge scale (increase ≥1 grade) or >25% enlargement in any area of damage. Logistic regression identified predictors of significant chondral surface change in each compartment from primary to revision surgery. Results: A total of 134 patients were included, with a median age of 19.5 years at revision surgery. Progression of articular cartilage damage was noted in 34 patients (25.4%) in the lateral compartment, 32 (23.9%) in the medial compartment, and 31 (23.1%) in the patellofemoral compartment. For the lateral compartment, patients who had >33% of the lateral meniscus excised at primary reconstruction had 16.9-times greater odds of progression of articular cartilage injury than those with an intact lateral meniscus (P < .001). For the medial compartment, patients who had <33% of the medial meniscus excised at the time of the primary reconstruction had 4.8-times greater odds of progression of articular cartilage injury than those with an intact medial meniscus (P = .02). Odds of significant chondral surface change increased by 5% in the lateral compartment and 6% in the medial compartment for each increased year of age (P ≤ .02). For the patellofemoral compartment, the use of allograft in primary reconstruction was associated with a 15-fold increased odds of progression of articular cartilage damage relative to a patellar tendon autograft (P < .001). Each 1-unit increase in BMI at the time of revision surgery was associated with a 10% increase in the odds of progression of articular cartilage damage (P = .046) in the patellofemoral compartment. Conclusion: Excision of the medial and lateral meniscus at primary ACL reconstruction increases the odds of articular cartilage damage in the corresponding compartment at the time of revision ACL reconstruction. Increased age is a risk factor for deterioration of articular cartilage in both tibiofemoral compartments, while increased BMI and the use of allograft for primary ACL reconstruction are associated with an increased risk of progression in the patellofemoral compartment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been documented to have worse outcomes compared with primary ACL reconstruction. Hypothesis: Certain factors under the control of the surgeon at the time of revision surgery can both negatively and positively affect outcomes. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction were identified and prospectively enrolled between 2006 and 2011. Data collected included baseline demographics, intraoperative surgical technique and joint disorders, and a series of validated patient-reported outcome instruments (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] subjective form, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC], and Marx activity rating scale) completed before surgery. Patients were followed up for 2 years and asked to complete an identical set of outcome instruments. Regression analysis was used to control for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), activity level, baseline outcome scores, revision number, time since last ACL reconstruction, and a variety of previous and current surgical variables to assess the surgical risk factors for clinical outcomes 2 years after revision ACL reconstruction. Results: A total of 1205 patients (697 male [58%]) met the inclusion criteria and were successfully enrolled. The median age was 26 years, and the median time since their last ACL reconstruction was 3.4 years. Two-year follow-up was obtained on 82% (989/1205). Both previous and current surgical factors were found to be significant contributors toward poorer clinical outcomes at 2 years. Having undergone previous arthrotomy (nonarthroscopic open approach) for ACL reconstruction compared with the 1-incision technique resulted in significantly poorer outcomes for the 2-year IKDC (P = .037; odds ratio [OR], 2.43; 95% CI, 1.05-5.88) and KOOS pain, sports/recreation, and quality of life (QOL) subscales (P ≤ .05; OR range, 2.38-4.35; 95% CI, 1.03-10.00). The use of a metal interference screw for current femoral fixation resulted in significantly better outcomes for the 2-year KOOS symptoms, pain, and QOL subscales (P ≤ .05; OR range, 1.70-1.96; 95% CI, 1.00-3.33) as well as WOMAC stiffness subscale (P = .041; OR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.02-3.03). Not performing notchplasty at revision significantly improved 2-year outcomes for the IKDC (P = .013; OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.08-1.99), KOOS activities of daily living (ADL) and QOL subscales (P ≤ .04; OR range, 1.40-1.41; 95% CI, 1.03-1.93), and WOMAC stiffness and ADL subscales (P ≤ .04; OR range, 1.41-1.49; 95% CI, 1.03-2.05). Factors before revision ACL reconstruction that increased the risk of poorer clinical outcomes at 2 years included lower baseline outcome scores, a lower Marx activity score at the time of revision, a higher BMI, female sex, and a shorter time since the patient’s last ACL reconstruction. Prior femoral fixation, prior femoral tunnel aperture position, and knee flexion angle at the time of revision graft fixation were not found to affect 2-year outcomes in this revision cohort. Conclusion: There are certain surgical variables that the physician can control at the time of revision ACL reconstruction that can modify clinical outcomes at 2 years. Whenever possible, opting for an anteromedial portal or transtibial surgical exposure, choosing a metal interference screw for femoral fixation, and not performing notchplasty are associated with significantly better 2-year clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Returning to a healthy level of physical activity is among the most commonly discussed clinical goals for patients recovering from anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). However, physical activity has not been objectively measured in this population. Purpose: To investigate differences in the mean time (min/d) spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) as well as the daily step count (steps/d) between patients who underwent ACLR and matched controls. A second purpose was to investigate relationships between MVPA and objective assessments of the daily step count and Tegner and Marx activity scales. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Physical activity was assessed using ActiGraph accelerometers in 33 participants with a history of primary unilateral or bilateral ACLR (mean time from surgery, 27.8 ± 17.5 months; range, 6-67 months) as well as in 33 healthy controls (matched on age, sex, and activity level). Participants wore the accelerometer for 7 days and completed the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective form and the Tegner and Marx activity scales. Independent t tests were used to determine differences in each dependent variable per group. Results: Patients who underwent ACLR spent less time in MVPA (ACLR: 79.37 ± 23.95 min/d; control: 93.12 ± 23.94 min/d; P = .02) and had a lower daily step count (ACLR: 8158 ± 2780 steps/d; control: 9769 ± 2785 steps/d; P = .02) compared with healthy matched controls. However, the Marx (ACLR median: 11.0 [interquartile range (IQR), 7-14]; control median: 12.0 [IQR, 8-13]; P = .85) and Tegner (ACLR median: 6.0 [IQR, 5-8]; control median: 7.0 [IQR, 6-8]; P = .12) scores did not differ between the groups, and no relationships were observed between objectively measured physical activity and scale measures (P > .05), except for a moderate relationship between the Tegner score and daily step count in the ACLR group (r = 0.36, P = .04). Only 24% of patients who underwent ACLR met the guideline of 10,000 steps per day compared with 42% of controls. Conclusion: Patients who underwent ACLR spent less time in MVPA and had a lower daily step count compared with highly matched controls (age, sex, and activity level) with no history of knee injuries. This was true despite being similar in activity levels, which brings into question the utility of the Tegner and Marx activity scales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]