Purpose To propose a technique of arthroscopic suture anchor primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) preservation for patients with proximal avulsion ACL tears that maintain excellent tissue ...quality. Methods We performed a retrospective review and early follow-up of 11 consecutive cases of ACL preservation. Patients were included if they had a proximal avulsion tear and excellent tissue quality confirmed to be adequate for repair during arthroscopy. Patients were excluded if these criteria were not met or if patients had multiligamentous injury patterns or significant arthrosis. The ACL was reinforced with a No. 2 FiberWire (Arthrex, Naples, FL) and a No. 2 TigerWire (Arthrex) and was anchored to the femoral footprint by two 4.75-mm BioComposite SwiveLock suture anchors (Arthrex). The surgical procedures were performed at 3 different hospitals by a single surgeon. Anterior stability was determined with a KT-1000 arthrometer (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA). Clinical outcomes were measured using the Lysholm score, modified Cincinnati score, Tegner activity score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and subjective and objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores. Results Ten of eleven patients had good subjective and clinical outcomes after ACL preservation surgery at a minimum of 2 years' and mean of 3.5 years' follow-up. The mean Lysholm score was 93.2; the mean modified Cincinnati score was 91.5; the preoperative Tegner activity score was maintained postoperatively in 8 of 10 patients; the mean Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score was 91.5; the mean subjective IKDC score was 86.4; and the objective IKDC score was A in 9 of 11 patients, B in 1 patient, and C in 1 patient. KT-1000 measurements were available in 8 of 11 patients, with 7 of 8 showing a side-to-side difference of less than 3 mm on maximum manual testing and 1 showing a 6-mm difference. Conclusions Preservation of the native ACL using the described arthroscopic primary repair technique can achieve short-term clinical success in a carefully selected subset of patients with proximal avulsion–type tears and excellent tissue quality. Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic case series.
To assess the mid-term clinical outcomes in patients with proximal avulsion anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears undergoing arthroscopic primary repair with suture anchors.
The first 11 consecutive ...patients with proximal avulsion tears treated with arthroscopic primary repair were evaluated at mid-term (minimum 5-year) follow-up. Physical examination was performed; laxity examination consisting of the Lachman, pivot-shift, and anterior drawer tests was performed; and patients were asked to complete the Lysholm, modified Cincinnati, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) questionnaires.
Of the 11 patients, 10 were seen at a mean follow-up of 6.0 ± 1.5 years (range, 4.8-9.2 years). One patient was lost to follow-up, in whom failure had already occurred at short-term follow-up. One additional patient underwent reoperation for a medial meniscus tear and also had a partial ACL tear; this patient was clinically stable at last follow-up. All patients had full range of motion. Nine patients had negative Lachman and negative pivot-shift examination findings (IKDC score of A), and 1 patient had a 1A Lachman result and 1+ pivot-shift result (IKDC score of B). The mean Lysholm score was 96.0 ± 4.5 (range, 88-100); modified Cincinnati score, 95.6 ± 7.4 (range, 80-100); Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, 95.4 ± 5.4 (range, 85-100); preinjury Tegner score, 7.2 ± 1.2 (range, 5-9); postoperative Tegner score, 6.6 ± 1.8 (range, 3-9); and IKDC subjective score, 92.3 ± 11.3 (range, 64-100).
The clinical outcomes of arthroscopic primary repair of proximal ACL tears with suture anchors are excellent and are maintained at mid-term follow-up in a carefully selected subset of patients with proximal tears and excellent tissue quality.
Level IV, therapeutic case series.
Purpose To describe the clinical and preclinical research conducted on primary repair of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) during the past 10 years. Methods A systematic search of PubMed, the ...Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase was performed for all English-language studies published between 2003 and April 2014 on primary repair of the ACL. Results Twenty-six studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. In the clinical research group, 8 studies (166 patients; age range, 10 to 71 years) met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were largely long-term clinical outcome studies, based on the original cohorts from the 1970s and 1980s, and suggested high failure rates, additional surgery, and revision for instability. A subset of patients, however, achieved good to excellent subjective and objective long-term outcomes. In the preclinical research group, 18 studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were based on an ACL transection model; they suggested that (1) stabilization of the knee with an internal suture strut improved the healing and biomechanical properties of the repaired ACL, (2) “enhancing” the repair with biological collagen-platelet composite augmentation improved healing and mechanical strength, (3) younger age and skeletal immaturity seem to correlate with improved histologic healing and biomechanical properties, (4) enhanced primary repair of the ACL may reduce post-traumatic osteoarthritis, and (5) the native ACL biomechanically outperformed the repaired ACL. Conclusions Although long-term human studies suggest collectively unacceptable outcomes for open primary repair of the ACL, a subset of patients achieved acceptable long-term results. ACL transection model animal studies showed improved healing and biomechanics with primary suture repair stabilization, early intervention, biological augmentation techniques, and younger age. Primary repair of the ACL may be an effective treatment modality for an appropriately selected subset of patients. Level of Evidence Level IV, systematic review of preclinical and clinical Level IV studies.
Purpose
Recent outcomes of arthroscopic primary repair of proximal anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears have been promising in small cohort studies. The purpose of this study was to assess outcomes ...of arthroscopic ACL repair in a larger cohort and to assess the role of additional augmentation.
Methods
The first 56 consecutive patients that underwent arthroscopic ACL repair were examined at minimum 2-year follow-up. The latter 27 patients 48.2% (27/56) received additional internal bracing with ACL repair. All 56 patients were included (100% follow-up). Mean age at surgery was 33.5 ± 11.3 years (59% male) and mean follow-up 3.2 ± 1.7 years. Clinical examination was performed using the objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form. Subjective outcomes were obtained using the Lysholm, modified Cincinnati, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and subjective IKDC scores.
Results
Six repairs (10.7%) failed and four additional patients underwent reoperation (7.1%): two for meniscus tears and two for suture anchor irritation. Objective IKDC scores were A in 38 (73%), B in 8 (15%) and C/D in 6 (12%) patients. Mean Lysholm score was 94 ± 7.6, modified Cincinnati 94 ± 8.9, SANE 90 ± 12.5, pre-injury Tegner 6.7 ± 1.5, current Tegner 6.2 ± 1.5, and subjective IKDC 90 ± 10.9. Failures rates were 7.4% with and 13.8% without internal bracing (
P
= 0.672). There were no statistically significant or clinically relevant differences in subjective outcomes.
Conclusion
Arthroscopic primary repair has resulted in good objective and subjective outcomes at 3.2-year follow-up in a carefully selected population. The role of additional internal bracing is possibly beneficial, but larger groups are needed to assess this.
Level of evidence
III.
Abstract Background The general opinion is that outcomes of open primary repair of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in the historical literature were disappointing. Since good outcomes of primary ...repair of proximal tears have recently been reported, we aimed to assess the role of tear location on open primary repair outcomes in the historical literature. Methods All studies reporting outcomes of open primary ACL repair published between the inception of PubMed, Embase and Cochrane and 2000 were identified. Studies were included if tear location was reported. Outcome scores, return to sports, stability examinations, failures and patient satisfaction were collected and reviewed in the total study cohort and in a subgroup of studies treating only proximal tears. Spearman correlation analysis was performed between the percentage of proximal tears in the studies and all outcomes. Results Twenty-nine studies were included reporting outcomes of open primary in 1457 patients of which 72% had proximal and 23% midsubstance tears. Mean age was 30 years, 65% were males, and mean follow-up was 3.6 years. Good outcomes were noted in the total cohort, and excellent outcomes were noted following repair of proximal tears. Positive correlation was found between the percentage proximal tears in the studies and percentage satisfied patients (p = 0.010). Conclusion Tear location seems to have played a role on the outcomes of open primary ACL repair. Furthermore, outcomes of open primary repair in patients with proximal tears were excellent, which confirms there may be a potential role for primary repair as treatment for proximal ACL tears.
Abstract Over the last century, many surgical treatments have been developed in the orthopedic field, including treatments of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries. These treatments ideally ...evolve in a process of trial and error with prospective comparison of new treatments to the current treatment standard. However, these evolutions are sometimes not linear and periodically undergo paradigm shifts. In this article, we review the evolution of ACL treatment and explain how it underwent a paradigm shift. Open primary ACL repair was the most common treatment in the 1970s and 1980s, but because multiple studies noted deterioration of outcomes at mid-term follow-up, in addition to several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that noted better outcomes following ACL reconstruction, the open primary repair technique was abandoned. At the end of the primary repair era, however, several studies showed that outcomes of open primary repair were good to excellent and did not deteriorate when this technique was selectively performed in patients with proximal ACL tears, whereas primary repair led to disappointing and unpredictable results in patients with mid-substance tears. Unfortunately, enrollment of patients in the aforementioned RCTs was already finished, ultimately leading to abandoning of open primary repair, despite the advantages of ligament preservation. In this review, we discuss (I) why the evolution of ACL treatment underwent a paradigm shift, (II) which factors may have played a role in this and (III) what the future role of arthroscopic primary ACL repair is in the evolution of ACL treatments.
To assess failure rates and patient-reported outcomes measures following arthroscopic primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair of proximal tears in different age groups.
Between 2008 and 2017, ...the first 113 consecutive patients treated with repair were retrospectively reviewed at minimum of 2 years. Patients were stratified into 3 age groups: ≤21, 22-35, and >35 years. Primary outcomes were ipsilateral reinjury or reoperation, and contralateral injury rates, and secondary outcomes consisted of Lysholm, modified Cincinnati, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective, pain, and satisfaction scores. Group differences were compared using χ2 tests and Mann–Whitney U tests.
Follow-up was obtained in 113 patients (100%). Median age was 35 years (interquartile range IQR 23-43) and median follow-up was 2.2 years (IQR 2.0-2.8). Overall, ACL reinjury occurred in 13 patients (11.5%), reoperation in 7 patients (6.2%), complications in 2 patients (1.8%) and contralateral ACL injury in 4 patients (3.5%). Overall, median Lysholm was 95 (IQR 89-100) and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective 92 (IQR 84-99). Treatment failure was significantly greater in the youngest age group (37.0%) as compared with the middle and older groups (4.2% and 3.2%, both P < .005). No significant differences were seen in reoperation, complication, or contralateral injury rates between groups (all P > .2), nor in patient-reported outcomes measures between the groups (all P > .1).
The failure rate of primary repair of proximal ACL tears is high in patients aged 21 or younger (37.0%), and this should be taken into account when discussing repair in this patient group. In patients older than 21, repair may be an excellent treatment with low failure (3.5%) and complication rates (1.2%) and good subjective scores.
Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.
Meniscal Root Tears: Diagnosis and Treatment Koenig, Jonathan H., B.A; Ranawat, Anil S., M.D; Umans, Hilary R., M.D ...
Arthroscopy,
09/2009, Letnik:
25, Številka:
9
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Abstract Meniscal tears within the body of the meniscus or at the meniscocapsular junction represent a well-understood and manageable condition encountered in clinical practice. In comparison, ...however, meniscal root tears (MRTs) often go unnoticed and represent a unique injury pattern with unique biomechanical consequences. Though first described decades ago, improvements in magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopy have only recently enhanced our diagnostic and treatment capabilities with regard to MRTs. This review contains an anatomic description of the roots including their significance in meniscal function as well as the consequences of their loss. In addition, how to properly identify MRTs and when it is appropriate to surgically repair them are described. Finally, we review the surgical techniques available in the existing literature and present an illustrative case.
To assess the extent to which patients forget their operative knee joint on a daily basis following arthroscopic primary repair as compared with reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ...at short- to mid-term follow-up.
For this retrospective study, all patients undergoing ACL surgery between May 2012 and May 2017 were identified. All patients were treated with the algorithm of undergoing arthroscopic primary repair for proximal tears and reconstruction for nonrepairable tears. Patients were contacted to complete the Forgotten Joint Score-12 questionnaire between 2 and 5 years following surgery. A greater score represents a more favorable outcome indicating the patient’s ability to “forget” the joint in everyday life, whereas lower scores indicate a less-favorable outcome. Data were analyzed using independent t-tests and χ2 tests, and multiple linear regression analysis was performed to correct for potential confounders.
Eighty-three patients completed the questionnaire (57%). Patients who underwent primary repair thought about their operated knee less when compared with those patients who underwent reconstruction (85.3 ± 14.2 vs 74.3 ± 23.3, P = .022). These differences were significantly greater in patients older than 30 years (85.3 ± 12.9 vs 62.6 ± 24.9, P = .007), male patients (85.0 ± 13.6 vs 72.5 ± 24.7, P = .037), and patients with a body mass index greater than 25 (85.9 ± 14.5 vs 64.7 ± 25.6, P = .009). After we corrected for potential confounders, the overall difference remained significant (P = .045).
Based on the data in this study, patients undergoing arthroscopic primary ACL repair can expect to have less daily awareness of their operated knee at short- to mid-term follow-up as compared with patients undergoing ACL reconstruction.
Retrospective comparative study, level III.
PDF
