Rate Of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Research Articles

The reverse fragility index: RCTs reporting non-significant differences in failure rates between hamstring and bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts have fragile results.

The reverse fragility index (RFI) is a novel metric to appraise the results of studies reporting statistically non-significant results. The purpose of this study was to determine the statistical robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting non-significant differences in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) graft failure rates, defined as re-rupture/revision ACLR rate, between hamstring tendon (HT) and bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) autografts by calculating RFIs. A systematic review was performed to identify RCTs that compared HT to BTB grafts for ACLR through January 2022. Studies reporting non-significant differences in graft re-rupture and revision ACLR rate (n.s.) were included. The RFI, defined as the fewest number of event reversals needed to change the non-significant graft re-rupture/revision outcome to statistically significant (P < 0.05), was recorded for each study. In addition, the number of studies in which the loss to follow-up exceeded the RFI was recorded. Among the 16 included RCTs, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) sample size was 71 (64-114), and the median (IQR) total number of graft re-rupture/revision ACLR events was 4 (4-6). The median (IQR) graft re-rupture/revision ACLR rate was 4.3% (3.0-6.4) overall, 4.1% (2.6-6.7) in the BTB group, and 5.4% (3.0-6.3) in the HT group. The median (IQR) RFI was 3 (3-4), signifying that a reversal of the outcome in 3 patients in one arm was needed to flip the studies' result from non-significant to statistically significant (P < 0.05). The median (IQR) number of participants lost to follow-up was 11 (3-13), and 13 (81.3%) of the included studies had a loss to follow-up greater than the studies' RFI. The results of RCTs reporting statistically non-significant re-rupture/revision ACLR rates between HT and BTB autografts would become significant if the outcome were reversed in a small number of patients-a number that was less than the loss to follow-up in the majority of studies. Thus, the neutrality of these studies is fragile, and a true statistically significant difference in re-rupture/revision rates may have been undetected. Level I.

Surgeon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction volume and rates of concomitant meniscus repair

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the effect of surgeon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) volume on rates of ACLR with concomitant meniscus repair versus meniscectomy and subsequent meniscus surgeries.MethodsA retrospective review was conducted from a database of all ACLR performed between 2015 and 2020 at a large integrated health care system. Surgeon volume was categorized as < 35 ACLR per year (low-volume), and ≥ 35 ACLR per year (high-volume). Rates of concomitant meniscus repair and meniscectomy were compared between low-volume and high-volume surgeons. Subgroup analyses compared the rates of subsequent meniscus surgery and procedure time based on surgeon volume and meniscus procedure type.ResultsA total of 3,911 patients undergoing ACLR were included. High-volume surgeons performed concomitant meniscus repair statistically significantly more often than low-volume surgeons (32.0% vs 10.7%, p < 0.001). Binary logistic regression indicated 4.15 times higher odds of meniscus repair among high-volume surgeons. Subsequent meniscus surgery occurred more commonly following ACLR with meniscus repair among low-volume surgeons (6.7% vs 3.4%, p = 0.047), but not high-volume surgeons (7.0% vs 4.3%, p = 0.079). Low-volume surgeons also had longer procedure times for concomitant meniscus repair (129.9 vs 118.3 min, p = 0.003) and meniscectomy (100.6 vs 95.9 min, p = 0.003).ConclusionsData from this study shows that surgeons with lower volume of ACLR select meniscus resection statistically significantly more often than higher-volume surgeons. However, an abundance of literature is available to show that meniscus loss negatively affects the development of post-traumatic osteoarthritis in patients Therefore, as demonstrated in this study by high-volume surgeons, the meniscus should be repaired and protected whenever possible.Level of EvidenceIII.

Risk Factors for Early Subsequent (Revision or Contralateral) ACL Reconstruction: A Retrospective Database Study.

Background:Many factors contribute to the risk for subsequent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) within 2 years from the index procedure.Purpose/Hypothesis:The purpose of this study was 2-fold: (1) to evaluate the incidence of subsequent (revision or contralateral) ACLR at 2 years in a large cohort and (2) to explore the association between patient-specific factors and early subsequent ACLR risk by age group. We hypothesize that 2-year subsequent (revision or contralateral) ACLR rates will be low and that risk factors for subsequent (revision or contralateral) ACLR will vary depending on a patient’s age group.Study Design:Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:The California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development Ambulatory Surgery Database was retrospectively reviewed to assess the incidence of 2-year subsequent (revision or contralateral) ACLR and to identify patient-specific risk factors for early subsequent (revision or contralateral) ACLR by age group between 2005 and 2014.Results:Of 94,108 patients included, the rate of subsequent (revision or contralateral) ACLR was highest in patients younger than 21 years (2.4 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 2.3-2.6) and lowest in those older than 40 years (1.3 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 1.2-1.4). Younger age, white race (compared with Hispanic in all age groups and Asian in age <21 or >40 years), private insurance if age younger than 21 years, public insurance or worker's compensation claims if age older than 30 years were significantly associated with an increased risk of subsequent (revision or contralateral) ACLR at 2 years.Conclusion:Results of the present study provide insight into subsequent (revision or contralateral) ACL reconstruction, which can be used to assess and modify treatment for at-risk patients and highlight the need for data mining to generate clinically applicable research using national and international databases.