Search

Infection is a rare occurrence after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (rACLR). Because of the low rates of infection, it has been difficult to identify risk factors for infection in this patient population. The purpose of this study was to report the rate of infection following rACLR and assess whether infection is associated with patient- and surgeon-dependent risk factors. We reviewed two large prospective cohorts to identify patients with postoperative infections following rACLR. Age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, history of diabetes, and graft choice were recorded for each patient. The association of these factors with postoperative infection following rACLR was assessed. There were 1423 rACLR cases in the combined cohort, with 9 (0.6%) reporting postoperative infections. Allografts had a higher risk of infection than autografts (odds ratio, 6.8; 95% CI, 0.9-54.5; p = .045). Diabetes (odds ratio, 28.6; 95% CI, 5.5-149.9; p = .004) was a risk factor for infection. Patient age, sex, BMI, and smoking status were not associated with risk of infection after rACLR., (© 2020 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

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.

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.

Purpose: To evaluate differences in short-term complications in patients treated with open arthrotomy or arthroscopy for septic arthritis (SA) of the native hip and identify risk factors associated with return to the operating room (ROR)., Methods: Patients who underwent hip arthrotomy or arthroscopy for native hip SA between 2007 and 2017 were queried in the Humana database via the PearlDiver research tool. Patients with a previous history of total hip arthroplasty were excluded from this study. Basic demographics and various 30-day perioperative complications, including ROR, were compared between the 2 cohorts. Multivariate analysis was performed for ROR within 30 days following arthroscopy and arthrotomy., Results: We identified 421 patients with SA of the native hip, of whom 387 (91.9%) and 34 (8.1%) were treated with open arthrotomy and arthroscopy, respectively. There were no significant differences in demographic variables between groups. On univariate analysis, the incidence of total adverse events (arthrotomy: 75.7% vs arthroscopy: 52.9%, P = .0038) was significantly greater in the open arthrotomy cohort. However, there was little difference in ROR between both cohorts (arthrotomy: 45.9% vs arthroscopy: 38.2%, P = .3836). Multivariate analysis identified preoperative septicemia or septic shock (odds ratio [OR] 1.90; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-2.89, P = .0026) as a significant risk factor for ROR within 30 days after surgery. Neither arthrotomy (OR 4.93, 95% CI 0.42-115.2, P = .2174) nor arthroscopy (OR 3.55, 95% CI 0.33-78.01, P = .3077) were significant risk factors to ROR., Conclusions: Patients with SA of the hip had similar short-term complication rates and ROR regardless of open arthrotomy or arthroscopic management. This suggests that arthroscopic management may be a safe option for the treatment of SA of the hip with potentially limited morbidity., Level of Evidence: Level IV (treatment harms investigation)., (Copyright © 2019 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.

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.

Background: Intra-articular glenohumeral joint changes frequently occur after shoulder instability events., Purpose: (1) To compare demographic characteristics, baseline patient-reported outcomes, and intraoperative findings for patients undergoing primary or revision shoulder stabilization surgery and (2) to determine the incidence of glenohumeral bone and cartilage lesions in this population while identifying factors independently associated with these lesions., Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: The Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Group shoulder instability database was used to identify all prospectively enrolled patients undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery for anterior instability between October 2012 and September 2016. Any patient who underwent surgery for posterior or multidirectional shoulder instability or concomitant rotator cuff repair surgery was excluded. Patient demographic characteristics, preoperative patient-reported outcomes, and intraoperative findings, including glenohumeral bone and cartilage lesions, were compared for patients undergoing primary and revision shoulder stabilization surgery. Additionally, patients with and without glenohumeral bone and cartilage lesions were compared and independent associations determined using multivariate analysis., Results: There were 545 patients available for analysis (461/545 [84.6%] primary; 84/545 [15.4%] revision). Patients undergoing revision surgery were older ( P = .001), were more frequently smokers ( P = .022), had a greater number of instability events before surgery ( P = .047), more frequently required reduction assistance ( P < .001), and had lower Short Form-36 (SF-36) Mental Component Summary ( P = .020) and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) ( P = .026) scores preoperatively. Additionally, patients undergoing revision surgery had a higher frequency of bone and cartilage lesions than those undergoing primary surgery (47.6% vs 18.4%, respectively; P < .001). Male sex, revision surgery, black race, increasing body mass index, increasing patient age, and lower preoperative SF-36 Physical Component Summary score were independently associated with the presence of glenohumeral bone and cartilage lesions at the time of shoulder stabilization surgery. Revision surgery was strongly associated with the presence of glenohumeral bone and cartilage lesions (odds ratio [OR], 4.381 [95% CI, 2.591-7.406]) and glenoid bone loss greater than 10% (OR, 9.643 [95% CI, 5.128-18.134]) or 20% (OR, 13.076 [95% CI, 5.113-33.438]) of the glenoid width., Conclusion: Glenohumeral bone and cartilage lesions are common at the time of shoulder stabilization surgery, occurring more frequently in patients undergoing revision surgery as compared with primary surgery. On the basis of these findings, future prospective studies should aim to compare the clinical outcomes in these 2 groups.

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.

BackgroundLytic 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.PurposeTo 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 designCohort study; Level of evidence, 3.MethodsA 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionTunnel 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.

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.

PurposeTo compare patients from a large multicenter cohort with a history of seizure and those without a history of seizure regarding preoperative and intraoperative findings and surgical procedures performed.MethodsPatients undergoing shoulder stabilization from 2011 to 2018 at 11 orthopaedic centers were prospectively enrolled. Those with a history of seizure were identified and compared with non-seizure controls. Preoperative demographic, history, physical examination, and imaging findings were collected. Intraoperative findings and surgical procedures performed were recorded. The Mann-Whitney test, χ2 test, and logistic regression analysis were used to examine differences between the groups and define independent risk factors. Owing to the number of statistical tests performed, the false discovery method was used to determine adjusted P values to achieve α < .05.ResultsDuring enrollment, 25 of 1,298 shoulder stabilization patients (1.9%) had a history of seizure. The sex ratio and age were similar between groups, as was posterior instability incidence (23.2% in control group vs 28.0% in seizure group). Seizure patients more frequently had more than 5 dislocations in the year preceding surgery (P = .016) and had increased preoperative radiographic evidence of bone loss (P < .001). Intraoperatively, seizure patients had a higher prevalence of reverse Hill-Sachs lesions (P < .001) and large (>30% of glenoid fossa) bony Bankart lesions (P < .001). Arthroscopic Bankart repair was the most common procedure in both groups. However, open procedures were performed in 15.6% of controls and 40.0% of seizure patients (P = .001). These procedures were most commonly bony procedures.ConclusionsSeizure patients had more prior dislocations, had more preoperative bone loss, and underwent more open stabilization procedures than controls because of bone loss. Studies examining recurrence after stabilization will help establish appropriate management practices in this population.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective review of prospectively collected cohort.

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.

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.

BackgroundRevision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been documented to have worse outcomes than primary ACL reconstruction. The reasons remain varied and not completely understood.MethodsPatients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction were prospectively enrolled. Data collected included baseline demographics, surgical technique and pathological condition, prescribed rehabilitation instructions, and a series of validated patient-reported outcome instruments. Patients were followed for 2 years and asked to complete a set of outcome instruments identical to those completed at baseline. Subsequent surgical procedures on the ipsilateral knee were recorded. Regression analysis was used to control for age, sex, activity level, baseline outcome scores, and the above-mentioned rehabilitation-related variables in order to assess the factors affecting clinical outcomes 2 years after revision ACL reconstruction.ResultsA total of 843 patients met the inclusion criteria and were successfully enrolled, and 82% (695) were followed for 2 years. Two rehabilitation-related factors were found to influence outcome. First, patients who were prescribed an ACL brace for their return to sports had a significantly better Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) for sports and recreational activities at 2 years (odds ratio [OR] =1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.07 to 2.11; p = 0.019). Second, patients prescribed an ACL brace for the postoperative rehabilitation period were 2.3 times more likely to have subsequent surgery by 2 years (OR = 2.26, 95% CI = 1.11 to 4.60; p = 0.024). The odds of a graft rerupture were not affected by any type of brace wear.ConclusionsRehabilitation-related factors that the physician can control at the time of an ACL reconstruction have the ability to influence clinical outcomes at 2 years. Weight-bearing and motion can be initiated immediately postoperatively. Bracing during the early postoperative period is not helpful. Use of a functional brace early in the postoperative period was associated with an increased risk of a reoperation. Use of a functional brace for a return to sports improved the KOOS on the sports/recreation subscale.Level of evidencePrognostic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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).

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

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

BackgroundRevision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been documented to have worse outcomes compared with primary ACL reconstructions.Purpose/hypothesisThe purpose of this study was to determine if the prevalence, location, and/or degree of meniscal and chondral damage noted at the time of revision ACL reconstruction predicts activity level, sports function, and osteoarthritis symptoms at 2-year follow-up. The hypothesis was that meniscal loss and high-grade chondral damage noted at the time of revision ACL reconstruction will result in lower activity levels, decreased sports participation, more pain, more stiffness, and more functional limitation at 2 years after revision surgery.Study designCohort study; Level of evidence, 2.MethodsBetween 2006 and 2011, a total of 1205 patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction by 83 surgeons at 52 hospitals were accumulated for study of the relationship of meniscal and articular cartilage damage to outcome. Baseline demographic and intraoperative data, including the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Marx activity score, were collected initially and at 2-year follow-up to test the hypothesis. Regression analysis was used to control for age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, activity level, baseline outcome scores, revision number, time since last ACL reconstruction, incidence of having a previous ACL reconstruction on the contralateral knee, previous and current meniscal and articular cartilage injury, graft choice, and surgeon years of experience to assess the meniscal and articular cartilage risk factors for clinical outcomes 2 years after revision ACL reconstruction.ResultsAt 2-year follow-up, 82% (989/1205) of the patients returned their questionnaires. It was found that previous meniscal injury and current articular cartilage damage were associated with the poorest outcomes, with prior lateral meniscectomy and current grade 3 to 4 trochlear articular cartilage changes having the worst outcome scores. Activity levels at 2 years were not affected by meniscal or articular cartilage pathologic changes.ConclusionPrior lateral meniscectomy and current grade 3 to 4 changes of the trochlea were associated with worse outcomes in terms of decreased sports participation, more pain, more stiffness, and more functional limitation at 2 years after revision surgery, but they had no effect on activity levels.RegistrationNCT00625885.

BackgroundKnees undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (rACLR) have a high prevalence of articular cartilage lesions.HypothesisThe prevalence of chondrosis at the time of rACLR is associated with meniscal status and lower extremity alignment.Study designCross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.MethodsData from the prospective Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) cohort were reviewed to identify patients with preoperative lower extremity alignment films. Lower extremity alignment was defined by the weightbearing line (WBL) as a percentage of the tibial plateau width, while the chondral and meniscal status of each weightbearing compartment was recorded at the time of surgery. Multivariable proportional odds models were constructed and adjusted for relevant factors to examine which risk factors were independently associated with the degree of medial and lateral compartment chondrosis.ResultsThe cohort included 246 patients with lower extremity alignment films at the time of rACLR. Mean (±SD) patient age was 26.9 ± 9.5 years and body mass index (BMI) was 26.4 ± 4.6. The medial compartment had more chondrosis (grade 2/3, 42%; grade 4, 6.5%) than did the lateral compartment (grade 2/3, 26%; grade 4, 6.5%). Disruption of the meniscus was noted in 35% of patients on the medial side and 16% in the lateral side. The mean WBL was 0.43 ± 0.13. Medial compartment chondrosis was associated with BMI (P = .025), alignment (P = .002), and medial meniscal status (P = .001). None of the knees with the WBL lateral to 0.625 had grade 4 chondrosis in the medial compartment. Lateral compartment chondrosis was significantly associated with age (P = .013) and lateral meniscal status (P < .001). Subjects with "intact" menisci were found to decrease their odds of having chondrosis by 64% to 84%.ConclusionThe status of articular cartilage in the tibiofemoral compartments at the time of rACLR is related to meniscal status. Lower extremity alignment and BMI are associated with medial compartment chondrosis.

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.

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 time between an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury and ACL reconstruction (ACLR) may influence baseline knee-related and general health-related patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Despite the common use of PROMs as main outcomes in clinical studies, this variable has never been evaluated. Purpose: To compare baseline health-related quality of life measures and the prevalence/pattern of meniscal and articular cartilage lesions between patients who underwent acute and chronic ACLR so as to provide clinicians with benchmark PROMs in 2 different patient populations with ACL injuries. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 1192 patients from the MOON (Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network) cohort who underwent primary ACLR were eligible. “Acute” ACLR was defined as <3 months (n = 853; 71.6%) and “chronic” ACLR as >6 months (n = 339; 28.4%) from injury. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics (articular cartilage injury, medial meniscal [MM] and lateral meniscal [LM] tears), and baseline PROM scores (Marx activity rating scale, International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] subjective form, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], and Short Form–36 Health Survey [SF-36]) were collected to determine whether the time from injury to ACLR influences (1) baseline PROMs and (2) the pattern and prevalence of concurrent articular cartilage and meniscal injuries. Analysis of covariance models were used to adjust for confounders on baseline outcome scores (age, sex, body mass index [BMI], smoking status, competition level, education). Results: The median patient age was 23 years (interquartile range [IQR], 17-35 years), 530 (44.5%) were female, and the median BMI was 25.0 kg/m2 (IQR, 22.3-27.9 kg/m2); however, the chronic group was older, had a higher BMI, and consisted of fewer collegiate athletes. A significantly greater number of partial LM tears were seen in the acute group versus the chronic group (14.2% vs 6.5%, respectively; P < .001), but there were more meniscal tears overall (73.5% vs 63.2%, respectively; P = .001), complete MM tears (49.0% vs 22.5%, respectively; P < .001), and articular cartilage injuries (54.0% vs 32.8%, respectively; P < .001) in the chronic group versus the acute group. After controlling for confounders, patients in the chronic ACLR group reported a significantly lower baseline Marx score (7.75 vs 12.10, respectively; P < .001) but higher baseline IKDC, SF-36 physical functioning, and all KOOS subscale scores except the KOOS–quality of life subscale score compared to those in the acute ACLR group; however, only the KOOS–sports and recreation subscale exceeded the minimum clinically importance difference of 8 points (62.30 vs 48.26, respectively; P < .001). Conclusion: After controlling for age, sex, competition level, smoking, and BMI, patients in the chronic ACLR group participated in less pivoting and cutting sports but reported better pain/function. Whether decreased activity is deliberate after an ACL injury or patients who undergo chronic ACLR are simply less active and may be treated successfully without surgery warrants further investigation. Nonrandomized studies that utilize PROMs should consider time from injury in study design and data interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Meniscal tears are frequently repaired during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Purpose: To systematically evaluate differences in clinical failures between all-inside and inside-out meniscal repairs performed during ACLR. Study Design: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review was perfomed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The databases queried included MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. All English-language studies reporting failure rates after meniscal repair with either the all-inside or inside-out technique performed in conjunction with ACLR were identified between 1980 and 2015. Studies with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Reported outcomes, clinical meniscal repair failures, and complications were assessed. Studies were weighted according to the size of the clinical series and mean follow-up length. Inverse-variance–weighted mixed models were used to evaluate whether there was a significant difference in pooled reoperation rates between repair techniques. Results: In total, 21 studies met inclusion criteria. Of these, 13 studies reported outcomes after all-inside repair, and 10 studies reported outcomes after inside-out repair (2 studies reported both). A total of 1126 patients were included in the analysis. The mean (±SD) follow-up for all-inside repair was 58.64 ± 22.24 months versus 76.25 ± 31.69 months for inside-out repair (P = .13). The clinical failure rate for all-inside meniscal repair performed concurrently with ACLR was 16% (121/744) compared with 10% (39/382) for inside-out repair, and this was found to be significant (P = .016). Implant irritation and device migration were the most common complications reported for all-inside repair; complication rates did not differ between the groups. Conclusion: There may be fewer early clinical failures when the inside-out technique is utilized for meniscal repair at the time of concomitant ACLR. Additional long-term studies will be useful to determine the operative success of these repairs over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Knee laxity in the setting of suspected anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is frequently 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 would be associated with increased risk of subsequent revision ACL reconstruction and worse patient-reported outcomes 2 years postoperatively. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: From an ongoing prospective cohort study, 2333 patients who underwent primary isolated ACL reconstruction without collateral or posterior cruciate ligament injury were identified. Patients reported by the operating surgeons as having an International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) grade D for Lachman, anterior drawer, or pivot-shift examination were classified as having high-grade laxity. Multiple logistic regression modeling was used to evaluate whether having high-grade preoperative laxity was associated with increased odds of undergoing revision ACL reconstruction within 2 years of the index procedure, controlling for patient age, sex, Marx activity level, level of competition, and graft type. Multiple linear regression modeling was used to evaluate whether having high-grade preoperative laxity was associated with worse IKDC score or Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Knee-Related Quality of Life subscale (KOOS-QOL) scores at a minimum 2 years postoperatively, 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 meniscus status. Results: Pre-reconstruction laxity data were available for 2325 patients (99.7%). Two-year revision data were available for 2259 patients (96.8%), and patient-reported outcomes were available for 1979 patients (84.8%). High-grade preoperative laxity was noted in 743 patients (31.9%). The mean postoperative IKDC score was 81.8 ± 15.9, and the mean KOOS-QOL score was 72.0 ± 22.0. The presence of high-grade pre-reconstruction laxity was associated with significantly increased odds of ACL graft revision (odds ratio [OR] = 1.87 [95% CI, 1.19-2.95]; P = .007). The presence of high-grade pre-reconstruction laxity was not associated with any difference in postoperative IKDC (β = −0.56, P = .44) or KOOS-QOL (β = 0.04, P = .97). Conclusion: The presence of high-grade pre-reconstruction knee laxity as assessed by manual physical examination under anesthesia is associated with significantly increased odds of revision ACL surgery but has no association with patient-reported outcome scores at 2 years after ACL reconstruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The management of meniscus tears identified at the time of primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is highly variable and includes repair, meniscectomy, and nontreatment. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the reoperation rate for meniscus tears left untreated at the time of ACL reconstruction with a minimum follow-up of 6 years. The hypothesis was that small peripheral tears identified at the time of ACL reconstruction managed with “no treatment” would have successful clinical outcomes. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients with meniscus tears left untreated at the time of primary ACL reconstruction were identified from a multicenter study group with a minimum 6-year follow-up. Patient, tear, and reoperation data were obtained for analysis. The need for reoperation was used as the primary endpoint, with analysis performed to determine patient and tear characteristics associated with reoperation. Results: There were 194 patients with 208 meniscus tears (71 medial, 137 lateral) left in situ without treatment with a complete follow-up for analysis. Of these, 97.8% of lateral and 94.4% of medial untreated tears required no reoperation. Sixteen tears (7.7%) left in situ without treatment underwent subsequent reoperation: 9 tears (4.3%) underwent reoperation in the setting of revision ACL reconstruction, and 7 tears (3.4%) underwent reoperation for an isolated meniscus injury. The patient age was significantly lower in patients requiring reoperation, while tears measuring ≥10 mm more frequently required reoperation. Conclusion: Lateral and medial meniscus tears left in situ at the time of ACL reconstruction did not require reoperation at a minimum 6-year follow-up for 97.8% and 94.4% of tears, respectively. These findings re-emphasize the low reoperation rate after the nontreatment of small, peripheral lateral meniscus tears while noting less predictable results for medial meniscus tears left without treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To analyse one institution's experience with multiligament knee injuries.Methods: Over 10 years, 133 multiligament knee injuries including 130 patients were included in the study. Inclusion criteria included: (1) injury to two or more knee ligaments (2) multiligament knee repair/reconstructive surgery.Results: The average age at time of injury was 26 years old, and 76 % were male. Fifty-one (38 %) multiligament knee injuries had >2 ligaments injured. Peroneal injuries occurred in 26 patients (20 %), and four (3 %) had associated vascular injuries. A high energy mechanism of injury was noted in 39 %. Twenty-five per cent of patients had an additional orthopaedic injury and, 11.5 % suffered additional non-orthopaedic injuries. Definitive surgical intervention was performed acutely (<3 weeks) in 47 %. Ninety-one per cent of multiligament knee injuries underwent reconstruction with or without repair. Forty-three complications occurred in 37 patients. Patients who suffered >2 ligament injury or had surgery acutely were at an increased risk of knee stiffness requiring manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) (p = 0.016 and p = 0.047, respectively). Knees with >2 ligaments injured were associated with higher post-operative complications (p = 0.007). Knee dislocation IV knees were at increased risk to undergo revision surgery (p = 0.041). Obese patients were more likely to have a post-operative infection (p = 0.038). Repair, reconstruction or type of graft used had no impact on need for revision surgery.Conclusions: Multiligament knee injured patients undergoing surgical intervention are a highly complex patient population. This study outlines the patient population, treatment, and complications of one academic institution over 10 years. Overall complications were higher in patients with >2 ligaments injured. Knee stiffness requiring MUA was more common in patients who had >2 ligaments ruptured and those treated acutely. Knees with all four ligaments injured were more likely to undergo revision surgery.Level Of Evidence: Retrospective case series, Level IV. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Meniscal repair is performed in an attempt to prevent posttraumatic arthritis resulting from meniscal dysfunction after meniscal tears. The socioeconomic implications of premature arthritis are significant in the young patient population. Investigations and techniques focusing on meniscus preservation and healing are now at the forefront of orthopaedic sports medicine. Hypothesis: Concomitant meniscal repair with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is a durable and successful procedure at 2-year follow-up. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: All unilateral primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions entered in 2002 in a cohort who had meniscal repair at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction were evaluated. Validated patient-oriented outcome instruments were completed preoperatively and then again at the 2-year postoperative time point. Reoperation after the index procedure was also documented and confirmed by operative reports. Results: A total of 437 unilateral primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions were performed with 82 concomitant meniscal repairs (54 medial, 28 lateral) in 80 patients during the study period. Patient follow-up was obtained on 94% (77 of 82) of the meniscal repairs, allowing confirmation of meniscal repair success (defined as no repeat arthroscopic procedure) or failure. The overall success rate for meniscal repairs was 96% (74 of 77 patients) at 2-year follow-up. Conclusion: Meniscal repair is a successful procedure in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. When confronted with a "repairable" meniscal tear at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, orthopaedic surgeons can expect an estimated >90% clinical success rate at 2-year follow-up using a variety of methods as shown in our study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Diabetes has been associated with adverse outcomes after various types of surgery. There are no previously published data regarding the effect of diabetes on outcomes from anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The purpose of this study was to test the hypotheses that diabetes is associated with worse clinical outcomes and a higher prevalence of subsequent surgeries after ACLR. Methods: Anterior cruciate ligament-deficient patients (n = 2198) undergoing unilateral ACLR from a multicenter prospective study were included. Patients who self-reported diabetes on the basis of comorbidity questions before surgery were identified from the database. They were compared with the remainder of the cohort who did not self-report diabetes. All patients were followed up for a minimum of 2 yr after their index surgery. A minimum 2-yr follow-up was attained on 1905/2198 (87%) via completed outcome questionnaires and 2096/2198 (95%) regarding subsequent surgery. The primary outcome measures were three validated outcome instruments. The secondary outcome measure was the incidence of additional surgery on the ipsilateral and contralateral knees. Results: Patients with diabetes had a significantly higher activity level at 2 yr (OR = 2.96; 95% CI, 1.30-6.77; P = 0.01), but otherwise slightly worse clinical outcomes, compared with patients without diabetes (OR range = 0.42-0.59). The prevalence of subsequent surgeries in patients with diabetes was not significantly different from the prevalence in patients without diabetes. Conclusions: Patients with diabetes maintain a higher activity level after ACLR despite slightly lower patient-reported outcome scores compared with patients without diabetes and do not have a higher rate of subsequent surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]