Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare return to sports, graft failure rates, and clinical outcomes in patients who underwent to a revision ACL reconstruction (R-ACLR) and additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) compared to isolated R-ACLR. Methods: A retrospective review of medical records of patients who underwent R-ACLR with or without a modified Lemaire LET was performed. Seventy-four patients with ≥ 2 years follow-up, who had a high-grade positive pivot shift test were included. Concomitant procedures such as meniscectomy and meniscal repair were collected along with any complications and/or graft failure. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form were collected. The ability to return to sports was defined as fully, partially, or not returned. Results: Thirty-nine patients underwent isolated R-ACLR (mean age (SD±) 29.2 ±12.2) and 35 had an additional LET (24.6 ±7.4). The mean length of follow-up in the R-ACLR group was 56.6 ±26.5 months compared to 44.3 ±17.6 months (p = 0.02*) (range 24 - 120 months) in the R-ACLR+LET group. PROMs were higher in the LET group with KOOS ADL (93.5 ± 2.0; 97.2 ± 1.6; p=0.03) and KOOS Sport (63.0 ± 3.6; 74.3 ± 3.8; p=0.05) subdomains reaching statistical significance. No other differences were found in the other KOOS subdomains or IKDC scores. Failure rates were not significantly different between the groups (12.8% for R-ACLR vs 11.4% for R-ACLR+LET; p=0.99). Thirteen (72.2%) patients in the R-ACLR group and 14 (60.8%) patients in the R-ACLR+LET group did not return to sports. Conclusion: R-ACLR with additional LET showed a similar failure rate and RTS compared to isolated R-ACLR following failed ACLR. The R-ACLR + LET group demonstrated better functional results with significantly higher activities of daily living, and sport and recreation KOOS subdomain scores. However, the present study was unable to recommend the modified Lemaire LET to be used routinely in revision ACLR patients. Level of evidence: III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.
Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Does Not Decrease Graft Failure in Revision ACL-R When Combined with Quadriceps Or Patella Tendon Grafts / Vivacqua, Thiago Alberto; Winkler, Philipp W.; Lucidi, Gian Andrea; Firth, Andrew D.; Musahl, Volker; Getgood, Alan M.J.. - In: ARTHROSCOPY. - ISSN 0749-8063. - ELETTRONICO. - 1:(2024), pp. 1-11. [10.1016/j.arthro.2024.01.034]
Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Does Not Decrease Graft Failure in Revision ACL-R When Combined with Quadriceps Or Patella Tendon Grafts
Lucidi, Gian Andrea;
2024
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare return to sports, graft failure rates, and clinical outcomes in patients who underwent to a revision ACL reconstruction (R-ACLR) and additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) compared to isolated R-ACLR. Methods: A retrospective review of medical records of patients who underwent R-ACLR with or without a modified Lemaire LET was performed. Seventy-four patients with ≥ 2 years follow-up, who had a high-grade positive pivot shift test were included. Concomitant procedures such as meniscectomy and meniscal repair were collected along with any complications and/or graft failure. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form were collected. The ability to return to sports was defined as fully, partially, or not returned. Results: Thirty-nine patients underwent isolated R-ACLR (mean age (SD±) 29.2 ±12.2) and 35 had an additional LET (24.6 ±7.4). The mean length of follow-up in the R-ACLR group was 56.6 ±26.5 months compared to 44.3 ±17.6 months (p = 0.02*) (range 24 - 120 months) in the R-ACLR+LET group. PROMs were higher in the LET group with KOOS ADL (93.5 ± 2.0; 97.2 ± 1.6; p=0.03) and KOOS Sport (63.0 ± 3.6; 74.3 ± 3.8; p=0.05) subdomains reaching statistical significance. No other differences were found in the other KOOS subdomains or IKDC scores. Failure rates were not significantly different between the groups (12.8% for R-ACLR vs 11.4% for R-ACLR+LET; p=0.99). Thirteen (72.2%) patients in the R-ACLR group and 14 (60.8%) patients in the R-ACLR+LET group did not return to sports. Conclusion: R-ACLR with additional LET showed a similar failure rate and RTS compared to isolated R-ACLR following failed ACLR. The R-ACLR + LET group demonstrated better functional results with significantly higher activities of daily living, and sport and recreation KOOS subdomain scores. However, the present study was unable to recommend the modified Lemaire LET to be used routinely in revision ACLR patients. Level of evidence: III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
