Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR) and Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis through the Modified Lemaire Technique versus Isolated ACLR: A Meta-analysis of Clinical Outcomes.

Abstract

Objective  Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) has been proposed to resolve rotatory instability following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of ACLR and ACLR with LET using the modified Lemaire technique. Materials and Methods  We performed a meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) staement. The literature search was performed on the PubMed, EBSCOHost, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and WileyOnline databases. The data extracted from the studies included were the study characteristics, the failure rate (graft or clinical failure) as the primary outcome, and the functional score as the secondary outcome. Comparisons were made between the patients who underwent isolated ACLR (ACLR group) and those submitted to ACLR and LET through the modified Lemaire technique (ACLR + LET group). Results  A total of 5 studies including 797 patients were evaluated. The ACLR + LET group presented a lower risk of failure and lower rate of rerupture than the ACLR group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.44; 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.26 to 0.75; I 2  = 9%; p  = 0.003). The ACLR + LET group presented higher scores on the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) regarding the following outcomes: pain, activities of daily living (ADL), sports, and quality of life (QOL), with mean differences of 0.20 (95%CI: 0.10 to 0.30; I 2  = 0%; p  < 0.0001), -0.20 (95%CI: -0.26 to -0.13; I 2  = 0%; p  < 0.00001), 0.20 (95%CI: 0.02 to 0.38; I 2  = 0%; p  = 0.03), and 0.50 (95%CI: 0.29 to 0.71; I 2  = 0%; p  < 0.00001) respectively when compared with the ACLR group. Conclusion  Adding LET through the modified Lemaire technique to ACLR may improve knee stability because of the lower rate of graft rerupture and the superiority in terms of clinical outcomes. Level of Evidence  I.