Abstract

PurposeTo compare acute ACL reconstruction (ACLR) within 8 days of injury with delayed reconstruction after normalized range of motion (ROM), 6–10 weeks after injury. It was hypothesized that acute ACL reconstruction with modern techniques is safe and can be beneficial in terms of patient-reported outcomes and range of motion.MethodsSample size calculation indicated 64 patients would be required to find a 5° difference in ROM at 3 months. Seventy patients with high recreational activity level, Tegner level 6 or more, were randomized to acute (within 8 days) or delayed (6–10 weeks) ACLR between 2006 and 2013. During the first 3 months following surgery patients were contacted weekly by SMS and asked ‘How is your knee functioning?’, with answers given on a Visual-Analog Scale (0–10). ROM was assessed after 3 months by the rehab physiotherapist. Patient-reported outcomes, objective IKDC and manual stability measurements were collected by an independent physiotherapist not involved in the rehab at the 6-month follow-up.ResultsAt 3-month follow-up, 91% of the patients were assessed with no significant differences in flexion, extension or total ROM demonstrated between groups. At the 6-month follow-up, the acute group had significantly less muscle atrophy of the thigh muscle compared to the contralateral leg. Furthermore, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the acute group passed or were close to passing the one leg hop test (47 versus 21%, p = 0.009). No difference was found between the groups in the other clinical assessments. Additionally, no significant difference between the groups was found in terms of associated injuries.ConclusionAcute ACLR within 8 days of injury does not appear to adversely affect ROM or result in increased stiffness in the knee joint when compared to delayed surgery.Level of evidenceII.

Highlights

  • Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) following an acute rupture is commonly recommended for people wishing to return to pre-injury athletic activity [29]

  • The inclusion criteria were: uni-lateral primary ACL-injury in patients between 18 and 40 years of age with no previous kneeinjury to either leg, Tegner activity level score [31] minimum level 6, no additional meniscus or cartilage damage on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) indicating the need for major acute meniscus or cartilage surgery, availability for reconstruction within 8 days of injury, no LCL-injury that needed surgery, no MCL-injury greater than grade 1, no PCL-insufficiency and no signs of osteoarthritis

  • The most important finding of this randomized control trial is that at 6-month follow-up there were no significant differences in range of motion (ROM) between patients who underwent acute ACL reconstruction (ACLR) compared to patients undergoing delayed surgery

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) following an acute rupture is commonly recommended for people wishing to return to pre-injury athletic activity [29]. Patients who undergo surgery are usually younger These techniques differ significantly from contemporary methods, with recent data showing almost 95% of all primary ACL reconstructions in the Swedish ACL-register are performed using a hamstring graft and purely arthroscopic procedures with low pressure systems are widely used [16]. Despite these developments, early reconstruction in the first weeks following ACL rupture is still commonly. Delayed reconstruction has been recommended worldwide in clinical practice for more than 20 years

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call