Search

Background: Patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are at an increased risk for posttraumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA). While we have previously shown that meniscal treatment with ACLR predicts more radiographic PTOA at 2 to 3 years postoperatively, there are a limited number of similar studies that have assessed cartilage directly with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Hypothesis: Meniscal repair or partial meniscectomy at the time of ACLR independently predicts more articular cartilage damage on 2- to 3-year postoperative MRI compared with a healthy meniscus or a stable untreated tear. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A consecutive series of patients undergoing ACLR from 1 site within the prospective, nested Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) cohort underwent bilateral knee MRI at 2 to 3 years postoperatively. Patients were aged Results: The cohort included 60 patients (32 female; median age, 18.7 years). Concomitant meniscal treatment at the time of index ACLR was performed in 17 medial menisci (13 meniscal repair and 4 partial meniscectomy) and 27 lateral menisci (3 meniscal repair and 24 partial meniscectomy). Articular cartilage damage was worse in the ipsilateral reconstructed knee ( P < .001). A meniscal injury requiring surgical treatment with ACLR predicted a worse CDS for medial meniscal treatment (medial compartment CDS: P = .005; whole joint CDS: P < .001) and lateral meniscal treatment (lateral compartment CDS: P = .038; whole joint CDS: P = .863). Other predictors of a worse relative CDS included age for the medial compartment ( P < .001), surgically observed articular cartilage damage for the patellofemoral compartment ( P = .048), and body mass index ( P = .007) and age ( P = .020) for the whole joint. Conclusion: A meniscal injury requiring surgical treatment with partial meniscectomy or meniscal repair at the time of ACLR predicted worse articular cartilage damage on MRI at 2 to 3 years after surgery. Further research is required to differentiate between the effects of partial meniscectomy and meniscal repair.

BackgroundAlthough 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.HypothesisIn 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 designCohort study; Level of evidence, 2.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsA 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).ConclusionBTB 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.

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.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.Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.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.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.These findings can be used to identify patients who are at the greatest risk of incurring subsequent surgery after ACL reconstruction.

BackgroundPatient-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/hypothesisThe 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 designCohort study; Level of evidence, 2.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionPROs 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.

BACKGROUND: Patient reported outcomes (PROs) are a valid measure of results following revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Revision ACL reconstruction has been documented to have worse outcomes compared with primary ACL reconstructions. Understanding positive and negative predictors of PROs will allow surgeons to modify and potentially improve outcome for these patients. HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe PROs following revision ACL reconstruction and test the hypothesis that patient and technique specific variables are associated with these outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study METHODS: Revision ACL reconstruction patients were identified and prospectively enrolled by 83 surgeons over 52 sites. Data collected included baseline demographics, surgical technique and pathology, and a series of validated PRO instruments (IKDC, KOOS, WOMAC and Marx activity rating score). 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, in order to determine both the positive and negative predictors of PRO scores at 2 years following revision surgery. RESULTS: 1205 patients met the inclusion criteria and were successfully enrolled. 697 (58%) were males, with a median cohort age of 26 years. The median time since their last ACL reconstruction was 3.4 years. Two-year questionnaire follow-up was obtained on 989 subjects (82%). The most significant positive predictors of 2-year IKDC scores were a high baseline IKDC score, high baseline Marx activity level, male gender, and having a longer time between a patient’s last ACL reconstruction, while negative predictors included having a previous lateral meniscectomy prior to the revision ACL reconstruction or having Grades 3/4 chondrosis in either the trochlear groove or medial tibial plateau at the time of the revision surgery. For KOOS, having a high baseline score and having a longer time between their last ACL reconstruction and revision surgery were significant positive predictors for having better (i.e. higher) 2-year KOOS scores, while having a previous lateral meniscectomy prior to the revision ACL reconstruction was a consistent predictor for having significantly worse (i.e. lower) 2-year KOOS scores. Statistically significant positive predictors for 2-year Marx activity levels included higher baseline Marx activity levels, younger age, male gender, and being a non-smoker. Negative 2-year activity level predictors included having an allograft or a biologic enhancement at the time of revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: PROs following 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 expectation as well as potentially improve outcome for these patients.

BackgroundAnterior 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.HypothesesParticipants 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 designCross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.MethodsA 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.ResultsTwo-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.ConclusionParticipation 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.

BackgroundThe 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 designCohort study; Level of evidence, 2.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsAnalyses 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).ConclusionThis 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).

BACKGROUND: The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) has demonstrated inferior psychometric properties when compared to the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC). The KOOS, Joint Replacement (KOOS,JR) is a validated short-form instrument to assess patient-reported outcome measures (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 anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with psychometric properties similar to that of the IKDC. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that 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. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic, Level II. METHODS: Using pre- and 2-year postoperative responses to the KOOS questionnaires from a sample of 1,904 primary ACL reconstruction patients, an aggregate score combining the KOOS,JR and the 4 KOOS Quality of Life questions, termed the KOOS(global), was developed. Again using the pre- and postoperative responses from the 1,904 ACL reconstruction patients, psychometric properties of the KOOS(global) were compared to the IKDC Subjective Score. Convergent validity between the KOOS(global) and IKDC was assessed with a Spearman correlation (rho). Responsiveness of the 2 instruments was assessed by calculating the pre- to effect size (ES) and relative efficiency (RE). Finally, the presence of a preoperative floor or postoperative ceiling effect was defined using the threshold of 15% of patients reporting either the worst possible (0 for both KOOS(global) and IKDC) or best possible scores (100 for both KOOS(global) and IKDC), respectively. RESULTS: The newly developed KOOS(global) was responsive after ACL reconstruction and demonstrated convergent validity with the IKDC. The KOOS(global) significantly correlated with IKDC scores (rho=.91, p

BackgroundArticular 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.HypothesisLarger 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 designCase-control study; Level of evidence, 3.MethodsSubjects 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.ResultsA 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

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: We hypothesized that 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: Prospective cohort study METHODS: Subjects who had both primary and revision data contained in the Multicenter Orthopaedics Outcomes Network (MOON) and Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) databases were included. Data reviewed included chondral surface status at the time of primary and revision surgery, meniscal 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 compartments according to progression on the modified Outerbridge scale (increase of ≥1 grade) or a greater than 25% enlargement in any area of damage. Logistic regression was used to identify 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 age19.5 years at revision surgery. Progression of articular cartilage damage was noted in 34 patients (25.4%) in the lateral compartment, 32 patients (23.9%) in the medial compartment, and 31 patients (23.1%) in the patellofemoral compartment. In the lateral compartment, patients who had greater than 33% of their 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 < 0.001). In the medial compartment, patients who had less than 33% of their 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 = 0.02). 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 ≤0.02). In the patellofemoral compartment, the use of allograft was associated with a 15-fold increased odds of progression of articular cartilage damage relative to a patellar tendon autograft (p < 0.001). Each one 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 = 0.046) 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.

BackgroundRevision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been documented to have worse outcomes compared with primary ACL reconstruction.HypothesisCertain factors under the control of the surgeon at the time of revision surgery can both negatively and positively affect outcomes.Study designCase-control study; Level of evidence, 3.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionThere 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.

BackgroundWhile 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.PurposeTo report the rate of reoperations, procedures performed, and risk factors for a reoperation 2 years after revision ACLR.Study designCase-control study; Level of evidence, 3.MethodsA 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.ResultsOf 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

Objectives: We studied the minimum 2 year follow-up outcomes in an ACL revision cohort. The hypothesis is that knees that hyperextend will have a worse outcome and greater odds of graft failure than knees that do not hyperextend. The null hypothesis is that there is no difference in outcomes or graft rupture between the two groups. Methods: Revision ACL reconstruction patients were identified and prospectively enrolled between 2006 and 2011. Data collected included baseline demographics, surgical technique and pathology, and a series of validated patient reported outcome instruments (IKDC, KOOS, WOMAC, and Marx activity rating score). Patients were followed up for 2 years, and asked to complete the identical set of outcome instruments. A regression model using graft failure as the dependent variable included graft type, age, and hyperextension greater than or equal to 5 degrees yes/no (HE) in order to assess these potential surgical risk factors for clinical outcomes 2 years after revision ACL reconstruction. Results: There were 1,145 subjects included in the analyses. The median age of the cohort was 26 (IQR= 20, 35), and 58% were male. The proportion that were enrolled for their first revision surgery was 88%, their second 10%, and third or greater 2%. The number of subjects categorized as HE was 375 (33%). The median age of subjects that failed was 18, compared to 26 for those with intact grafts. All three variables included in our regression model were significant predictors of graft failure: younger age, inter-quartile range odds ratio (IQROR) = 3.32 (95%CI 1.5, 7.2) p= 0.002; use of allograft OR = 3.1 (95%CI 1.4, 6.9) p= 0.01, and HE 2.1 (95%CI 1.02, 4.42) p= 0.04. Conclusion: The MARS Study Group has previously reported that young age and the use of allograft as a graft source are independent predictors (over 3X odds ratio) of graft rupture after revision ACLR. This study found that knee hyperextension greater than or equal to 5 degrees is present in 1/3 of patients who undergo revision ACLR. HE is also an independent predictor of graft failure after revision ACLR. This is the first study to investigate and confirm knee physiologic hyperextension as a risk factor (over 2X odds ratio) of graft rupture in ACL surgery. Future reports on ACL reconstruction results should separately evaluate the group of knees that hyperextend 5 degrees or more as compared to those that do not.

To determine which patient and injury factors are associated with the detection of high-grade laxity on examination under anesthesia before anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.We identified 2,318 patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction without associated ligament injuries. Demographic data and information regarding meniscal tears were collected. Patients with high-grade Lachman (difference from contralateral side10 mm), pivot-shift (International Knee Documentation Committee grade 3+), or anterior drawer (difference from contralateral side10 mm) tests were identified by physical examination under anesthesia before ACL reconstruction. Logistic regression modeling was used to evaluate whether chronicity of the ACL injury, patient age, sex, body mass index, generalized ligamentous laxity, and presence of meniscal tears were associated with increased odds of high-grade laxity, while we controlled for examining surgeon.Patients with chronic tears (6 months from injury) had greater than twice the odds of having high-grade Lachman, pivot-shift, and anterior drawer tests (all P.001) relative to patients with acute tears (3 months from injury). Generalized ligamentous laxity (odds ratio [OR], 2.33; P.001) and the presence of medial (OR, 1.63; P.001) or lateral (OR, 1.41; P = .013) meniscus tears were associated with increased odds of a high-grade Lachman test. Age younger than 20 years (OR, 1.34; P = .023), female sex (OR, 1.49; P = .001), generalized ligamentous laxity (OR, 3.46; P.001), and the presence of a medial (OR, 1.53; P.001) or lateral (OR, 1.27; P = .041) meniscus tear were associated with increased odds of a high-grade pivot-shift test. Generalized ligamentous laxity (OR, 2.27; P.001) and the presence of a medial (OR, 1.73; P = .001) or lateral (OR, 1.50; P = .010) meniscus tear were associated with increased odds of a high-grade anterior drawer test.Chronic ACL tears, generalized ligamentous laxity, and meniscus tears are associated with increased odds of high-grade laxity with all 3 tests. Female patients and age younger than 20 years are associated with increased odds of a high-grade pivot-shift test.Level II, lesser-quality prospective study.

There is sparse literature regarding the prognosis and predictors of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction outcomes at six years as measured by validated patient-based outcome instruments and assessed by multivariable analysis. Knowing prognostic information would be valuable in physician counseling of patients considering ACL reconstruction. Large sample sizes with adequate follow-up are necessary for such analysis. A previously published randomized controlled trial had an enrollment of 225 patients1, which limits risk factor analysis. A previous cohort study utilizing multivariable analysis was limited by 69% follow-up and the lack of baseline measurements of the outcomes2, which are important to adjust for, as they are often the strongest predictor of follow-up scores. The Short Form-36 (SF-36) is a widely used measure of general quality of life. It allows for comparison across different disease categories; therefore, normative-based scoring converts the scores such that they have direct interpretation related to the general United States population, with a mean score (and standard deviation) of 50 ± 10 points. Hence, a 1-point change in a score is one-tenth of a standard deviation or an effect size of 0.103. The Short Form-6 dimension (SF-6D), a preference-based utility measure, can be calculated from the SF-36, allowing the calculation of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)4. Previous studies utilizing the SF-36 in athletic populations have compared domain scores, ranging from 0 to 100 points, to normative values, which do not as easily lend themselves to interpretation, but have not reported normative-based scores5,6. The eight subscales of the SF-36 can be collapsed into two components, the Physical Component Summary (PCS) score and the Mental Component Summary (MCS) score. The use of the PCS and MCS has been advocated for large studies, particularly when there is a focus on the general effect on health7. The aim of the current study was to determine the prognosis and predictors of health-related quality of life as measured by the SF-36 at two and six years after surgery as well as the utility gained following ACL reconstruction as measured by the SF-6D. These results should aid evidence-based decision-making as related to a patient’s prognosis following ACL reconstruction, should provide a high level of evidence for surgeon decision-making, and should have the potential to identify future modifiable risk factors that could be altered to improve outcomes of ACL reconstruction. Furthermore, the improvements in health-related quality of life and utility according to the SF-6D should provide justification for expenditures related to patients with ACL injuries.

Objectives: Meniscus repairs are commonly performed concurrently with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in the acutely injured knee. Properly functioning menisci coupled with knee stability are thought to be critical factors in achieving optimal outcomes. While meniscal repair in conjunction with ACLR has demonstrated good success at 2 years, no large-scale, prospective, multicenter studies have evaluated long-term patient-oriented outcomes after combined ACLR and meniscus repair. We hypothesize that patient-centered outcome scores will deteriorate and ipsilateral reoperations will increase at 6 years following combined ACLR and meniscus repair. Methods: All unilateral primary ACL reconstructions from the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) between 2002 and 2004 were evaluated, and patients who underwent concurrent meniscus repair were selected. Validated patient-oriented outcome data [Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) scores, Marx activity scores and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores] was gathered at 2 and 6 years following the index procedure. Subsequent ipsilateral knee re-operation was confirmed by operative reports to evaluate for failure of meniscal repairs. Results: In total, 1440 primary ACLR’s were performed between 2002 and 2004 as part of the study cohort. Of these, 286 subjects underwent concurrent meniscus repair (298 meniscal repairs). 235/286 (82.2%) were available for follow up at 6 years (154 medial meniscus repairs, 72 lateral meniscal repairs, and 9 patients who underwent both lateral and medial meniscal repairs). Overall, the success rate of meniscal repair at the time of ACLR was 86% (202/235) at 6 years. We found an 86.4% six year success rate with combined ACLR and medial meniscal repair, 86.1% for lateral meniscal repairs and 77.8% when both medial and lateral menisci were repaired. 27.3% (9/33) of the failures were associated revision ACL surgery. Medial meniscal repairs failed earlier (mean 2.1 years) than lateral meniscal repairs (mean 3.7 years) (p=0.01). All-inside techniques were performed in 88.5% of cases. There were 31 failures with this technique representing a 14.9% failure rate. There was one failure in the inside-out technique group (1/19, 5.2%), and one failure noted in the outside-in technique group (1/6, 16.6%). Significant improvements were observed in patient reported outcomes [KOOS Symptoms, KOOS Pain, KOOS KRQOL, WOMAC Pain, and IKDC scores] when baseline scores were compared to 6-year follow-up. No significant clinical differences were observed between 2 and 6 year follow up indicating there was no clinical deterioration over this time period. Marx Activity levels gradually declined from time of injury to 6-year follow-up. Conclusion: Concurrent meniscal repair with ACLR is associated with success rates approximating 86% at 6-year follow-up. Patient-oriented outcome measures were generally similar between 2 and 6 years follow up. Surgeons may expect good clinical outcomes 6 years after combined ACLR and meniscus repairs.

BackgroundThe factors that lead to patients failing multiple anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions are not well understood.HypothesisMultiple-revision ACL reconstruction will have different characteristics than first-time revision in terms of previous and current graft selection, mode of failure, chondral/meniscal injuries, and surgical charactieristics.Study designCase-control study; Level of evidence, 3.MethodsA prospective multicenter ACL revision database was utilized for the time period from March 2006 to June 2011. Patients were divided into those who underwent a single-revision ACL reconstruction and those who underwent multiple-revision ACL reconstructions. The primary outcome variable was Marx activity level. Primary data analyses between the groups included a comparison of graft type, perceived mechanism of failure, associated injury (meniscus, ligament, and cartilage), reconstruction type, and tunnel position. Data were compared by analysis of variance with a post hoc Tukey test.ResultsA total of 1200 patients (58% men; median age, 26 years) were enrolled, with 1049 (87%) patients having a primary revision and 151 (13%) patients having a second or subsequent revision. Marx activity levels were significantly higher (9.77) in the primary-revision group than in those patients with multiple revisions (6.74). The most common cause of reruptures was a traumatic, noncontact ACL graft injury in 55% of primary-revision patients; 25% of patients had a nontraumatic, gradual-onset recurrent injury, and 11% had a traumatic, contact injury. In the multiple-revision group, a nontraumatic, gradual-onset injury was the most common cause of recurrence (47%), followed by traumatic noncontact (35%) and nontraumatic sudden onset (11%) (P < .01 between groups). Chondral injuries in the medial compartment were significantly more common in the multiple-revision group than in the single-revision group, as were chondral injuries in the patellofemoral compartment.ConclusionPatients with multiple-revision ACL reconstructions had lower activity levels, were more likely to have chondral injuries in the medial and patellofemoral compartments, and had a high rate of a nontraumatic, recurrent injury of their graft.