Search

Background: The incidence of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is increasing, and quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft is gaining popularity for both primary and revision ACL reconstruction., Purpose: To evaluate the differences in the patient-reported functional outcomes, concomitant injuries, and graft failure in primary versus revision ACL surgery using QT autograft., Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: A total of 376 patients with primary ACL reconstruction and 138 patients with revision ACL reconstruction were retrospectively retrieved from a prospectively collected ACL registry. A minimally invasive technique was used for QT autograft harvesting. The surgical procedure and rehabilitation protocol were identical in both groups. To maintain a homogeneous cohort for the study, the groups were matched by age, sex, and preinjury outcome scores (Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity level, and visual analog scale [VAS] for pain). Initial baseline assessments of outcome scores were compared with scores collected at the 2-year postoperative mark., Results: The mean age of the primary group and revision group was 32.9 ± 10.2 years (range, 18-55 years) and 32.3 ± 9.9 years (range, 19-55 years) respectively. Significant preinjury to postoperative improvements were noted in Lysholm (88.2 ± 16.4 vs 83.5 ± 15.0; P = .007) and VAS pain (0.9 ± 1.3 vs 1.5 ± 1.6; P = .001) scores after primary ACL reconstruction compared with revision reconstruction. However, no significant difference was found in Tegner activity level (6.7 ± 1.8 vs 5.9 ± 1.8; P > .430). Primary ACL injury was associated with significantly higher concomitant medial collateral ligament injuries ( P = .019), while the revision group was associated with significantly higher concomitant cartilage ( P = .001) and meniscal ( P = .003) injuries. A significantly higher graft failure rate was noted in the revision group compared with the primary ACL reconstruction group (13.0% vs 5.6%; P = .005)., Conclusion: Both primary and revision ACL reconstruction with QT autograft had acceptable functional outcomes. The primary group had better outcomes than the revision group, possibly due to the lower prevalence of meniscal and cartilage injuries in the primary group compared with the revision group. The revision group was associated with higher graft failure than the primary group. QT autograft is a viable graft choice for both primary and revision ACL reconstruction., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: C.F. has received consulting fees from Medacta and Karl Storz and royalties from Karl Storz. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto. Ethical approval for this study was obtained from Medizinischen Universität Innsbruck (reference No. AN2015-0050 346/4.28)., (© The Author(s) 2024.)

Background: Different indications and treatment options for combined injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and medial collateral ligament complex (MCL) are not clearly defined., Purpose: To perform a modified Delphi process with the Committee for Ligament Injuries of the German Knee Society (DKG) in order to structure and optimize the process of treating a combined injury to the ACL and MCL., Study Design: Consensus statement., Methods: Scientific questions and answers were created based on a comprehensive literature review using the central registers for controlled studies of Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane including the terms medial collateral ligament , anterior cruciate ligament , MCL , ACL , and outcome used in various combinations. The obtained statements passed 3 cycles of a modified Delphi process during which each was readjusted and rated according to the available evidence (grades A-E) by the members of the DKG Ligament Injuries Committee and its registered guests., Results: The majority of answers, including several questions with >1 graded answer, were evaluated as grade E (n = 16) or C (n = 10), indicating that a low level of scientific evidence was available for most of the answers. Only 5 answers were graded better than C: 3 answers with a grade of A and 2 answers with a grade of B. Only 1 answer was evaluated as grade D. An agreement of >80% (range, 83%-100%) among committee members was achieved for all statements., Conclusion: The results of this modified Delphi process offer a guideline for standardized patient care in cases of combined injuries to the ACL and MCL., Competing Interests: The authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest in the authorship and publication of this contribution. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Background: The use of the interference screw (IFS) for the cortical fixation of tendon grafts in knee ligament reconstruction may lead to converging tunnels in the multiligament reconstruction setting. It is unknown whether alternative techniques using modern suture anchor (SA) or bone staple (BS) fixation provide sufficient primary stability., Purpose: To assess the primary stability of cortical fixation of tendon grafts for medial collateral ligament (MCL) reconstruction using modern SA and BS methods in comparison with IFS fixation., Study Design: Controlled laboratory study., Methods: Cortical tendon graft fixation was performed in a porcine knee model at the tibial insertion area of the MCL using 3 different techniques: IFS (n = 10), SA (n = 10), and BS (n = 10). Specimens were mounted in a materials testing machine, and cyclic loading for 1000 cycles at up to 100 N was applied to the tendon graft, followed by load-to-failure testing. Statistical analysis was performed using 1-way analysis of variance., Results: There were no statistical differences in elongation during cyclic loading or peak failure load during load-to-failure testing between BS (mean ± standard deviation: 3.4 ± 1.0 mm and 376 ± 120 N, respectively) and IFS fixation (3.9 ± 1.2 mm and 313 ± 99.5 N, respectively). SA fixation was found to have significantly more elongation during cyclic loading (6.4 ± 0.9 mm; P < .0001) compared with BS and IFS fixation and lower peak failure load during ultimate failure testing (228 ± 49.0 N; P < .01) compared with BS fixation., Conclusion: BS and IFS fixation provided comparable primary stability in the cortical fixation of tendon grafts in MCL reconstruction, whereas a single SA fixation led to increased elongation with physiologic loads. However, load to failure of all 3 fixation techniques exceeded the loads expected to occur in the native MCL., Clinical Relevance: The use of BS as a reliable alternative to IFS fixation for peripheral ligament reconstruction in knee surgery can help to avoid the conflict of converging tunnels., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: Support for this study was received from the Open Access Publication Fund of the University of Münster. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Background: Microfracture (MF) is an established operative treatment for small, localized chondral defects of the knee joint. There is evidence from animal studies that matrix augmentation of bone marrow stimulation (m-BMS) can improve the quality of the repair tissue formation., Purpose: To evaluate the therapeutic outcome of a matrix made of polyglycolic acid and hyaluronan as compared with a conventional MF technique., Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1., Methods: Patients between the ages of 18 and 68 years who had an articular femoral cartilage defect of 0.5 to 3 cm 2 in the weightbearing area of the femoral condyles with indication for MF were included in this study. Patients were randomized and treated with either MF or m-BMS with Chondrotissue. Defect filling, as assessed on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), at postoperative 12 weeks was defined as the primary outcome measure, with follow-up MRI at weeks 54 and 108. Follow-up data were also collected at 12, 54, and 108 weeks after surgery and included patient-reported clinical scores: visual analog scale for pain, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee score, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey., Results: MRI scans confirmed cartilage repair tissue formation in both groups 12 weeks after treatment. There was no significant difference between the m-BMS and MF groups in the percentage of defect filling at 12, 54, and 108 weeks postoperatively. No significant difference was found in terms of patient-reported clinical scores. Both groups showed significant improvement in 4 KOOS subscales-Pain, Activities of Daily Living, Sport and Recreation, and Quality of Life-at 54 and 108 weeks after treatment., Conclusion: This is the first randomized controlled trial comparing m-BMS with a polyglycolic acid matrix with hyaluronan with MF. The use of the Chondrotissue implant in m-BMS has been proven to be a safe procedure. No difference was found between m-BMS and MF in terms of patient-reported outcome scores and MRI assessment until postoperative 2 years. Long-term follow-up studies including histological assessment are desirable for further investigation., Registration: EUCTR2011-003594-28-DE (EU Clinical Trials Register)., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: This study was sponsored by BioTissue AG Switzerland. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto., (© The Author(s) 2020.)