Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Research Articles

Intermediate-Term Clinical Outcomes of High-Density Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation in Patients with Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Focal Chondral Lesions.

To investigate intermediate-term clinical results in patients with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and chondral defect treated with high-density autologous chondrocyte implantation (HD-ACI) compared to patients without ACL tear but with a chondral lesion and HD-ACI treatment. Forty-eight patients with focal chondral lesions underwent HD-ACI (24 with ACL reconstruction after an ACL injury and 24 with an intact ACL). Follow-up assessments occurred at 6, 12, and 24 months. Patient-reported knee function and symptoms were assessed using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) questionnaire, pain was measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and adverse events were monitored. Physical activity was assessed using the Tegner Activity Level Scale, and cartilage healing was evaluated with the Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART) score. No significant adverse events occurred during follow-up. Both groups showed significant improvements at 2 years compared to baseline (VAS: 8.0 ± 1.3 to 1.4 ± 2.0 [normal ACL]; 7.4 ± 2.3 to 2.1 ± 2.3 [ACL reconstruction]; IKDC: 39.2 ± 10.6 to 76.1 ± 22.0 [intact ACL]; 35.6 ± 12.1 to 74.6 ± 20.9 [ACL reconstruction]). Patients in both groups exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for IKDC scores. The Tegner Activity Level Scale decreased immediately after surgery and increased after 2 years, with 70.6% (normal ACL) and 89.5% (ACL reconstruction) returning to their preinjury activity levels. No significant differences in the MOCART score were observed between the groups. ACL reconstruction does not appear to reduce the outcomes (at 2 years) of HD-ACI.

Effect of Posterior Tibial Slope on Outcomes After Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Increased posterior tibial slope (PTS) leads to a relative anterior translation of the tibia on the femur. This is thought to decrease the stress on posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction (PCLR) grafts. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of PTS on knee laxity, graft failure, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores after PCLR without concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). It was hypothesized that patients with higher PTS would have less knee laxity, fewer graft failures, and better PROs compared with patients with lower PTS. Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. All patients who underwent PCLR between 2001 and 2020 at a single institution were identified. Patients were excluded if they underwent concomitant or prior ACLR or proximal tibial osteotomy, were younger than 18 years, had <2 years of in-person clinical follow-up, and did not have documented PRO scores (Lysholm score and International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] score). Data were collected retrospectively from a prospectively gathered database. PTS measurements were recorded from perioperative lateral knee radiographs. A linear regression model was created to analyze PTS in relation to PRO scores. Patients with a grade 1 (1-5 mm) or higher posterior drawer were compared with those who had a negative posterior drawer. A total of 37 knees met inclusion criterion; the mean age was 30.7 years at the time of surgery. The mean clinical follow-up was 5.8 years. No significant correlation was found between either the Lysholm score or the IKDC score and the PTS. Twelve knees (32.4%) had a positive posterior drawer at final follow-up. The mean PTS in knees with a positive posterior drawer was 6.2°, whereas that for knees with a negative posterior drawer was 8.3° (P = .08). No significant differences in PRO scores were identified for knees with versus knees without a positive posterior drawer. No documented graft failures or revisions were found. No significant differences were found in PROs or graft failure rates based on PTS at a mean of 5.8 years after PCLR. Increased tibial slope trended toward being protective against a positive posterior drawer, although this did not reach statistical significance.

MRI Criteria for Healing at 1 Year After Repair of a Traumatic Meniscal Tear

Background: Meniscal repair for a traumatic meniscal tear is increasingly used to preserve the meniscus. Interpreting postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans remains challenging, especially in symptomatic patients. There is a lack of reliable MRI criteria to affirm the healed character of a traumatic meniscal injury repair. Purpose: To identify relevant MRI criteria for meniscal healing after meniscal repair. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We prospectively included all patients with a traumatic meniscal injury who underwent either an isolated meniscal repair or a repair during a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A standardized preoperative and postoperative clinical evaluation was performed, along with collection of functional scores—Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm Score, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. An MRI scan was performed 1 year postoperatively and compared with the preoperative MRI scan. The following MRI aspects were analyzed: variation of morphology and fat-saturated (FS) T2 intensity signal and pre- and postoperative tear diastasis measurement. Results: Fifty patients (age, mean ± SD, 28.7 ± 8.5 years [range, 16-45 years]) who were 1 year postoperative were included. All patients were considered clinically healed had the same MRI characteristics. A signal change (FS T2) was observed from a high signal intensity fluid to a nonfluid moderate signal intensity. The morphology of the lesion was more complex: from the initial lesion, line ramifications appeared, creating the appearance of tree branches. The tear diastasis decreased (from 2.3 ± 0.5 mm [range, 1.3-3.5] to 1.1 ± 0.28 mm [range, 0.5-1.5]). Conclusion: MRI criteria confirming meniscal healing after traumatic meniscal repair at 1 year were identified: a change in the intrameniscal signal becoming nonfluid and moderate in intensity; a reduction in tear diastasis to <1.5 mm; and a change in the signal morphology of the repaired meniscus.

Impact of Biologic Augmentation on Revision Surgery Rates After Meniscus Repair: A Matched-Cohort Analysis of 3420 Patients.

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) have gained popularity in recent years as biologic approaches to potentially augment healing after meniscus repair. There have been few studies comparing outcomes in patients undergoing meniscus repair with versus without biologic augmentation and, furthermore, little clarity on the role of biologic augmentation for meniscus repairs performed with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). To determine the association of BMAC or PRP augmentation with revision surgery after both isolated meniscus repair and meniscus repair performed concomitantly with ACLR. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. The PearlDiver Mariner dataset was queried to identify all patients who underwent primary meniscus repair, both with and without concomitant ACLR, and who received ipsilateral BMAC or PRP at the time of surgery. Patients who underwent similar surgery but without BMAC or PRP augmentation were then identified and matched in a 5:1 ratio according to age, sex, body mass index, and various comorbidities to 3 separate BMAC/PRP augmentation groups: overall cohort (with and without ACLR), repair with concomitant ACLR, and isolated repair. The primary outcome was revision meniscus surgery (meniscectomy or revision meniscus repair). Overall, 3420 patients (570 with BMAC/PRP augmentation; 2850 matched controls without augmentation) were included. There were no significant differences in the reported demographics or comorbidities between any of the BMAC/PRP groups and their respective matched controls (P > .05 for all comparisons). There was no difference in revision rate between BMAC/PRP-augmented isolated meniscus repairs and matched controls (P = .235). Patients who underwent BMAC/PRP-augmented meniscus repair with concomitant ACLR experienced a significantly lower incidence of revision surgery compared with matched controls without BMAC/PRP augmentation (5.2% vs 7.9% respectively; odds ratio, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27-0.63; P < .001), but the number of revisions was relatively small. There was no association between BMAC or PRP augmentation and the incidence of revision surgery after isolated primary meniscus repair. There was a statistically significant decrease in the rate of revision meniscus surgery when BMAC or PRP was used to augment meniscus repairs in the setting of concurrent ACLR; however, the overall revision rates were small.

More Is Not Merrier: Increasing Numbers of All-Inside Implants Do Not Correlate with Higher Odds of Revision Surgery.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between the number of all-inside meniscal repair implants placed and the risk of repair failure. We hypothesized that the use of higher numbers of all-inside meniscus repair implants would be associated with increased failure risk. A retrospective chart review identified 351 patients who underwent all-inside meniscus repair between 2006 and 2013 by a sports medicine fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeon at a single institution. Patient demographics (age, body mass index [BMI], sex) and surgical data (number of implants used, concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction [cACLR], and tear type/size/location) were recorded. Patients who received repairs in both menisci or who had follow-up < 1-year postoperatively were excluded. Repair failure was identified through chart review or patient interviews defined as a revision surgery on the index knee such as partial meniscectomy, total knee arthroplasty, meniscus transplant, or repeat repair. Logistic regression modeling was utilized to evaluate the relationship between the number of implants used and repair failure. A total of 227 all-inside meniscus repairs were included with a mean follow-up of 5.0 ± 3.0 years following surgery. Repair failure was noted in 68 knees (30.3%)-in 28.1% of knees with fewer than four implants and in 35.8% of knees with four or more implants (p = 0.31). No significant increase in failure was observed with increasing number of all-inside medial (odds ratio [OR]: 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-1.7; p = 0.46) or lateral (OR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.47-1.57; p = 0.63) implants after controlling for patient age, BMI, cACLR, tear type, or size. Tears of the lateral meniscus located in the red-white and white-white zones had lower odds of failure (OR: 0.14; 95% CI: 0.02-0.88; p = 0.036) than tears within the red-red zone, and patients with cACLR had lower odds of repair failure (OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.18-0.86, p = 0.024) than those without. The number of all-inside implants placed during meniscus tear repair did not affect the likelihood of repair failure leading to reoperation after controlling for BMI, age, tear type, size, location, and cACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Poster 341: Clinical Outcomes of Concomitant Arthroscopically Assisted Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Meniscal Allograft Transplantation

Objectives: Single-stage meniscus allograft transplantation (MAT) with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a technically challenging procedure for management of knee pain and instability in younger patients. However, there is limited data on specific outcomes of this procedure, such as return to work and functional status relative to the U.S. population at large. The purpose of this study was to assess surgical and patient-reported outcomes following concomitant ACLR and MAT. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent concomitant ACLR and MAT at our institution from 2010 to 2021. We included patients who underwent either concomitant primary or revision ACLR and medial or lateral MAT with a minimum follow-up of 8 months. Complications, graft failures, and reoperations were abstracted from patient records and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain, satisfaction, Lysholm Knee Scale, return to sport, and return to work outcomes were assessed using an email survey. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference, Pain Intensity, and Physical Function Scores were used to measure patients’ functional status relative to the U.S. population. All p-values less than 0.05 were considered significant. Results: The cohort consisted of 18 knees of 17 individual patients (16 unilateral, 1 bilateral). The cohort were majority male (15 patients; 83%) with mean age of 31.6 years (range 19-49) and mean BMI of 27.6 (range 22.2-53.3). Mean follow-up time was 47.3 months (range 8-101). A majority underwent revision ACLR (12 patients; 67%) with medial MAT (18 patients; 92%). Reoperation rate was high (5 patients; 28%) but only one patient experienced recurrence of painrequiring TKA. Patient-reported outcomes (n = 14) were generally positive with low VAS pain (mean 2.2), high satisfaction (mean 77.9%), and fair Lysholm score (mean 81.1) though satisfaction was lower among revision ACLR patients versus primary ACLR patients (mean 67% vs 100%; p = 0.04). Return to work rate was high (13 patients; 93%) while return to sport rate was low (6 patients; 43%). Postoperative PROMIS scores were comparable or superior to the national average and correlated significantly with patient satisfaction (p &lt; 0.05). Conclusions: The concomitant ACLR and MAT procedure is associated with excellent knee pain and functional outcomes, low rates of complications and meniscus graft failure, and high rate of return to work after surgery. However, rate of return to sport is low and satisfaction is worse among revision ACLR patients. Overall, the single-stage ACLR and MAT procedure appears to be a safe and efficacious treatment option for patients with concomitant ACL and meniscus deficiency.

Poster 270: Joint Preservation and Complications of Tibial Tubercle Osteotomy at a Minimum of 5- Year Follow-up

Objectives: To report the incidence of complications after TTO at a minimum of 5-year follow-up. As a secondary outcome, we aimed to identify predictors of postoperative complications. As a tertiary outcome, we aimed to report the rate of progression of knee osteoarthritis. We hypothesized that recurrent instability following TTO is rare and the rate of progression of knee osteoarthritis is slow Methods: Patients undergoing primary TTO between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2015, and having a minimum of 5-year clinical follow-up data were included. Exclusion criteria were patients with shorter than 5-year follow-up, revision TTO, TTO following total knee arthroplasty, concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, history of or concomitant distal femoral osteotomy, history of soft tissue procedures or trochleaplasty for patellar instability, congenital patella dislocation or patellar instability secondary to a congenital disorder/syndrome. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were collected on a RedCAP database. Risk factors for complications were identified using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 72 (50 female/22 male) patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 22.0 years. The mean follow-up period was 104.8 months (67-138). Sixty-four patients underwent anteromedialization TTO and 8 underwent medialization TTO. The median BMI was 26.4 kg/m2. Sixty-six patients had isolated TTO, and 11 patients had TTO and concomitant medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction. One screw was used in 5 patients and 2 screws in 67 patients. Tibial tubercle was distalized in 25 patients and not distalized in 47 patients. Fifty-six patients reported they never smoked before their surgery and 15 patients reported they smoked at some point in their lives before the surgery. The overall complication rate was 30.5% (22/72). The incidence of major complications was 6.9%. Univariate logistic regression analysis on complications revealed patients who ever smoked are more likely to experience a postoperative complication (OR=4.33 (1.29, 14.53), p-value = 0.018). Multivariable model for complication, using TTO Procedure as the main predictor revealed TTO procedure (TTO vs TTO+STP), number of screws, and distalization didn’t affect complication rates. Multivariable model for complication, using TTO Technique (AMZ vs MZ) as the main predictor, revealed no difference in TTO technique. The mean radiographic follow-up was 67 moths. The preoperative rate of patients with Kellgren-Lawrence grade III-IV increased from 11.7% to 18.8% at the last follow-up. The rate of patients with an osteophyte on knee radiographs was 33.3% before surgery and increased to 39.1% at the last follow up. Of 72 patients, 12 were athlete. Rate of return to sports was 91.6% (11/12) after TTO procedure. Mean time to return to sports was 27.6±10.2 weeks. Conclusions: Tibial tubercle osteotomy is a viable option for the treatment of patellar instability with low recurrence and major complication rates at mid and long-term follow-up. It successfully prevents and slows the progression of knee osteoarthritis by changing the contact biomechanics. Patients who smoke should be counseled about the increased risks of complications before the surgery. [Table: see text][Table: see text][Table: see text][Table: see text]

Poster 266: Outcomes of Surgical Stabilization for Recurrent Patellar Instability in Competitive Wrestlers: Outcomes, Reoperations, and Return to Play at 6 years Mean Follow Up

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess return to play (RTP), patient-reported outcomes (PRO), and reoperation rates following patellofemoral stabilization surgeries (PSS) for recurrent patellar instability (RPI) in a cohort of competitive wrestlers. Methods: All competitive wrestlers with a history of an RPI and subsequent PSS at a single institution between 2000 and 2020 were identified. Primary PSS ranged from MPFL reconstruction (n = 31; 50%) or MPFL repair (n = 22; 33.5%), and other PSS (n = 9; 14.5%) in the form of tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO), lateral retinaculum release (LRR), and medial retinaculum reefing (MRR). Exclusion criteria included revision PSS, or concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction or multi ligament knee injury. All patients were contacted for determination of reinjury rates, current sport status, and PROs. Surgical failure defined as subsequent patellar dislocation despite operative management or need for secondary PSS. Results: Ultimately, 62 knees in 56 wrestlers were included at a mean follow-up time of 6.6 years (range, 2.0 – 18.8 years). RTP occurred in 55.3% of wrestlers at a mean of 8.8 ± 6.7 months. Among the PSS no differences were observed between rates of RTP (P = .676), postoperative pain (P = .176), Tegner activity level (P = .801), International Knee Documentation Committee (P = .378), Lysholm (P = .402), or Kujala scores (P = .370). Recurrent patellar instability was the most common complication in 21% of knees. Among PSS types, MPFL reconstruction had the lowest rate of RPI (6.5% vs. 27.3% vs. 55.6%; P = .005), and surgical failure (9.7% vs. 31.8% vs. 55.6%; P = .008). Kaplan-Meier survivorship free from surgical failure of the entire cohort was 91.9% at 1 year, 77.7% at 5 years, and 65.7% at 15 years. MPFL reconstruction had the highest survivorship when compared to MPFL repair and other PSS up to 10 years after the index surgery (90.3% vs. 64.1% vs. 27.8%; P = .048). Conclusions: Recurrent patellar instability remains a concern for competitive wrestlers after PSS. MPFL reconstruction may serve as a more durable surgical treatment option with lower rates of RPI and failure when compared to other PSS up to 10 years after surgery. [Table: see text]

Poster 333: Outcomes of Anterior Closing Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy in Patients Undergoing ACL Revision Reconstruction

Objectives: Graft failure rates following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction have been reported up to 30%. According to the literature, one anatomic variant linked to graft reinjury is a high posterior tibial slope. As a result, surgeons are exploring the effectiveness of slope reducing high tibial osteotomy (HTO) to reduce the subsequent reinjury risk. While cadaveric models indicate that this procedure decreases the forces across the ACL graft, there is limited evidence demonstrating its efficacy in clinical trials. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare self-reported patient outcomes between patients undergoing ACL revision surgery with a slope reducing high tibial osteotomy (ACL+HTO) and matched controls undergoing revision ACL reconstruction without slope reducing HTO. We hypothesized that patients undergoing ACL+HTO would exhibit similar outcomes with a low failure rate when compared to their matched counterparts. Methods: A retrospective matched-case control study was conducted for patients undergoing ACL revision reconstruction from 2018 to 2021, utilizing a single surgeon database (n = 1,781). Patients in the HTO group were included if they were at least one year out from surgical ACL reconstruction and slope reducing osteotomy. Patients were excluded if they had a primary ACL reconstruction or no concomitant ACL reconstruction with an HTO. Patients in the ACL+HTO group were age, gender, and setting-matched to a control group of patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction. Descriptive patient demographic and surgical data were obtained, including pre/postoperative posterior tibial slope (o) for the HTO group. Complications and injury surveillance was conducted throughout the postoperative follow-up period. Primary outcome measures included the Single Assessment Numeric Scale (SANE), and graft failure rates at 24 months. Secondary outcomes included return to sport rate and level, and postoperative complications (infection, loss of motion, deep vein thrombosis, etc). Generalized linear models were conducted using parametric and nonparametric equivalents to compare baseline and outcome measures between groups with an a-priori alpha level of .05. Results: From a group of 364 revision ACL reconstructions, 9 patients met the inclusion criteria for the ACL+HTO group (Table 1). This group was age, gender and revision matched to 30 patients in the control group. Baseline comparisons revealed that the ACL control group weighed more than the experimental group (198.2 ±26.4 vs 183.7 ±21.7, P &lt;.001), however all other comparisons were not statistically different. The mean pre op posterior tibial slope was 19.2o ±4.1o and 7.7o ±2.3o following HTO (mean diff: -11.5o, P &lt;.001). Mean time to follow-up was 1.82 ±0.3 years. At follow-up, there were no statistical differences in self-reported knee function (SANE score), graft reinjury rate, rate of return to sport, or level of return to sport between groups (Table 2). There were no graft reinjuries reported in the ACL+HTO group, and approximately 85.8% returned to some level of sporting activity with 42% returning to a level I or II cutting and pivoting sport. Conclusions: Preliminary evidence provided in the current study suggests that slope reducing HTO in the setting of revision ACL reconstruction for large posterior tibial slope deformities is effective at correcting malalignment and avoiding graft failure out to 2 years. This procedure also holds promise to allow a majority of patients to return to various levels of sporting activities. To our knowledge, this is the first comparative study comparing the intermediate outcomes of this subpopulation to a matched revision ACL cohort. While these data do provide evidence for ongoing investigation, it is important to note that this pilot study is underpowered and we strongly recommend the performance of larger clinical trials to confirm these results. [Table: see text][Table: see text]

Poster 350: Outcomes of Anterior Closing Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy in Patients Undergoing Revision ACL Reconstruction

Objectives: Graft failure rates following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction have been reported up to 30%. According to the literature, one anatomic variant linked to graft reinjury is a high posterior tibial slope. As a result, surgeons are exploring the effectiveness of slope reducing high tibial osteotomy (HTO) to reduce the subsequent reinjury risk. While cadaveric models indicate that this procedure decreases the forces across the ACL graft, there is limited evidence demonstrating its efficacy in clinical trials. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare self-reported patient outcomes between patients undergoing ACL revision surgery with a slope reducing high tibial osteotomy and matched controls undergoing revision ACL reconstruction without slope reducing HTO. We hypothesized that patients undergoing ACL+HTO would exhibit similar outcomes with a low failure rate when compared to their matched counterparts. Methods: A retrospective matched-case control study was conducted for patients undergoing ACL revision reconstruction from 2018 to 2021, utilizing a single surgeon database (n = 1,781). Patients in the HTO group were included if they were at least one year out from surgical ACL reconstruction and slope reducing osteotomy. Patients were excluded if they were undergoing primary ACL reconstruction or no concomitant ACL reconstruction. Patients in the ACL+HTO group were age, gender, and setting-matched to a control group of patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction. Descriptive patient demographic and surgical data were obtained, including pre/postoperative posterior tibial slope(o) for the HTO group. Complications and injury surveillance was conducted throughout the postoperative follow-up period. Primary outcome measures included the Single Assessment Numeric Scale (SANE), and graft failure rates at 24 months. Secondary outcomes included return to sport rate/level and postoperative complications (infection, loss of motion, deep vein thrombosis, etc). Generalized linear models were conducted using parametric and nonparametric equivalents to compare baseline and outcome measures between groups with an a-priori alpha level of .05. Results: From a group of 364 revision ACL reconstructions, 9 patients met the inclusion criteria for the ACL+HTO group (Table 1). This group was age, gender and revision matched to 30 patients in the control group. Baseline comparisons revealed that the ACL control group weighed more than the experimental group (198.2 ±26.4 vs 183.7 ±21.7, P &lt;.001), however all other comparisons were not statistically different. The mean pre operative posterior tibial slope was 19.2o ±4.1o and 7.7o ±2.3o following HTO (mean diff: -11.5o, P &lt;.001). Mean time to follow-up was 1.82 ±0.3 years. At follow-up, there were no statistical differences in self-reported knee function (SANE score), graft reinjury rate, rate of return-to- sport, or level of return to sport between groups (Table 3). There were no graft reinjuries reported in the ACL+HTO group and approximately 85.8% returned to some level of sporting activity with 42% returning to a level I or II cutting and pivoting sport. Conclusions: Preliminary evidence provided in the current study suggests that slope reducing HTO in the setting of revision ACL reconstruction for large posterior tibial slope deformities is effective at correcting malalignment and avoiding graft failure out to 2 years. This procedure also holds promise to allow a majority of patients to return to various levels of sporting activities. To our knowledge, this is the first comparative study comparing the intermediate outcomes of this subpopulation to a matched revision ACL cohort. While these data do provide evidence for ongoing investigation, it is important to note that this pilot study is underpowered and we strongly recommend the performance of larger clinical trials to confirm these results. [Table: see text][Table: see text]

Surgical Stabilization for Recurrent Patellar Instability in Competitive Wrestlers: Outcomes, Reoperations, and Return to Play at 6-Year Mean Follow-up

Background: The extent to which recurrent patellar instability (RPI) affects wrestlers has not been thoroughly examined. Purpose: To assess return to wrestling (RTW), patient-reported outcomes, and reoperation rates after patellofemoral stabilization surgery (PFSS) for RPI in a cohort of competitive wrestlers. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All competitive wrestlers with a history of RPI and subsequent PFSS performed at a single institution between 2000 and 2020 were identified. Primary PFSS procedures included medial patellofemoral (MPFL) reconstruction (n = 31; 50%); MPFL repair (n = 22; 35.5%); or other PFSS (n = 9; 14.5%), such as tibial tubercle osteotomy, lateral retinacular release, and/or medial retinacular reefing. Exclusion criteria included revision PFSS or concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction or multiligament knee injury. Surgical failure was defined as subsequent patellar dislocation despite operative management or need for secondary PFSS. Results: Ultimately, 62 knees in 56 wrestlers with a mean age of 17.0 years (range, 14.0-22.8 years) were included at a mean follow-up of 6.6 years (range, 2.0-18.8 years). RTW occurred in 55.3% of wrestlers at a mean ± SD 8.8 ± 6.7 months. Among PFSS types, no differences were observed in rates of RTW (P = .676), postoperative pain (P = .176), Tegner activity level (P = .801), International Knee Documentation Committee (P = .378), Lysholm (P = .402), or Kujala scores (P = .370). RPI was the most common postoperative complication (n = 13; 21.0%). MPFL reconstruction had the lowest rate of RPI (6.5% vs 27.3% [repair] vs 55.6% [other]; P = .005) and surgical failure (9.7% vs 31.8% [repair] vs 55.6% [other]; P = .008). Kaplan-Meier survivorship free from surgical failure of the entire cohort was 91.9% at 1 year, 77.7% at 5 years, and 65.7% at 15 years. MPFL reconstruction had the highest survivorship when compared with MPFL repair and other PFSS up to 10 years after the index surgery (90.3% vs 64.1% vs 27.8%; P = .048). Conclusion: RPI remains a concern for competitive wrestlers after PFSS. MPFL reconstruction may serve as a more durable surgical treatment option with lower rates of RPI and failure when compared with other PFSS procedures at up to 10 years after surgery.

Save the Meniscus: The Meniscal Mantra Remains Durable: Commentary on an article by Rick W. Wright, MD, et al.: "Ten-Year Outcomes of Second-Generation, All-Inside Meniscal Repair in the Setting of ACL Reconstruction".

Commentary Save the meniscus. Save the meniscus. Save the meniscus. This is a subconscious orthopaedic mantra that we have all heard and repeated numerous times. Ever since Fairbank’s landmark study in 1948, “Knee Joint Changes After Meniscectomy,” and numerous later studies, we have learned to respect the importance of preserving the meniscus and, in turn, preventing degenerative changes1. In 2023, we may continue to debate over the best repair technique and the best repair augmentation and/or biologics, but we can all agree that we should do what we can to preserve and repair the meniscus. This has been demonstrated to be even more certain in the setting of a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Literature has demonstrated that meniscal tears heal better in the environment of an ACLR and, therefore, we should attempt to repair and preserve the meniscus as much as possible in this setting2,3. Historically, inside-out meniscal repair techniques were considered the gold standard, but as all-inside techniques have become more reliable, user-friendly, and able to mimic the traditional technique, they are more popularly used4. There are few 10-year outcome studies, and not many that examine all-inside meniscal suture devices; therefore, I commend Wright et al. on their current study. The authors performed a Level-IV retrospective review of 81 patients with a meniscal repair and concomitant primary ACLR using the second-generation, all-inside FAST-FIX Meniscal Repair System (Smith & Nephew). Some of these patients were included in their previous study evaluating outcomes of all-inside, second-generation repair at a 5-year follow-up4. In this current study, 69 of the 81 patients had a 10-year follow-up and 9 (13%) of the 69 patients had a failed meniscal repair, which was defined as a repeat surgical intervention involving resection or revision repair. The authors demonstrated that 84% to 88% of patients had a successful repair and all patients, regardless of failure, had favorable patient-reported outcome measures, which included the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, and the Marx Activity Rating Scale score, at 10 years. There were 59 medial repairs and 22 lateral repairs, and, of all the repaired tears, there were 13 bucket-handle tears, and the remaining tears were vertical longitudinal tears in the red-red or red-white vascular region. The study did not include radial tears, root tears, or ramp lesions. The mean number of sutures used for repair was only 2. Concerns with regard to the study include the lack of a comparison group, the use of older devices, and the shorter postoperative rehabilitation protocol. There are now third-generation, all-inside repair devices available, and the postoperative rehabilitation after a meniscal repair and ACLR is now ≥8 months. Perhaps this longer rehabilitation time can influence meniscal repair success or failure rates. The authors have demonstrated that the success rate of meniscal repair is 84% to 88% using an all-inside, second-generation technique with a concomitant ACLR. Although this is considered successful, what else can we do to optimize our success rates even more? Should we use better techniques and devices, or orthobiologics? How will this change as we repair different types of tears, including root and ramp tears? Also, how will longer rehabilitation affect meniscal healing and retear rates? If our mantra, save the meniscus, remains true, then I look forward to future data demonstrating what else we can do to improve success rates with all tears (bucket-handle, longitudinal, root, and ramp) with newer techniques and biologics.

Ten-Year Outcomes of Second-Generation, All-Inside Meniscal Repair in the Setting of ACL Reconstruction.

Meniscal repair is the goal, whenever possible, for the treatment of meniscal injury. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical success of meniscal repair performed with a second-generation, all-inside repair device with a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected patients who underwent meniscal repair by a single surgeon using the all-inside FAST-FIX Meniscal Repair System (Smith & Nephew) in conjunction with a concurrent ACL reconstruction. Eighty-one meniscal repairs (81 patients) were identified: 59 medial repairs and 22 lateral repairs. Clinical failure was defined as repeat surgical intervention involving resection or revision repair. Clinical outcomes were assessed with the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, and Marx Activity Rating Scale score. Ten-year follow-up was obtained for 85% (69) of 81 patients. Nine patients (13% of 69) underwent a failed meniscal repair (6 medial, 3 lateral), corresponding to a failure rate of 12% (6 of 50) for medial repairs and 16% (3 of 19) for lateral repairs. The mean time to failure was 2.8 years (range, 1.2 to 5.6 years) for the medial repairs and 5.8 years (range, 4.2 to 7.0 years) for the lateral repairs (p = 0.002). There was no difference in mean patient age, sex, body mass index, graft type, or number of sutures utilized between successful repairs and failures. Postoperative KOOS and IKDC outcome scores significantly improved over baseline scores (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in patient-reported outcomes at 10 years between the group with successful repairs and those who had a failed repair. This report of long-term follow-up results of primary second-generation, all-inside meniscal repair demonstrates its relative success when it is performed with concurrent ACL reconstruction. After a minimum follow-up of 10 years, 84% to 88% of the patients continued to demonstrate successful repair. Failure of medial meniscal repairs occurred significantly earlier compared with lateral meniscal repairs. Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Meniscal Repair Outcome in 3829 Patients With a Minimum Follow-up From 2 Years Up to 5 Years: A Meta-analysis on the Overall Failure Rate and Factors Influencing Failure

Background: The importance of meniscal repair is widely accepted because of the association of loss of meniscal tissue with the development of early-onset knee arthritis. Many factors influencing the results of meniscal repair have been reported, but results remain controversial. Purpose: This meta-analysis determines the pooled meniscal repair failure rate of studies with a minimum follow-up of 2 years up to 5 years, with a mean follow-up of 43 months. Moreover, selected failure-influencing factors are analyzed. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: PubMed and Scopus were searched for studies published between January 2000 and November 2021 reporting on meniscal repair outcome with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. The overall pooled failure rate and pooled failure rates for possible predictors were calculated. Random-effect models were used to pool failure rates, and effect estimates in the form of odds ratios with 95% CIs were established. Results: The initial literature search identified 6519 studies. A total of 51 studies met the inclusion criteria. In total, 3931 menisci were included with an overall failure rate of 14.8%. Subgroup analysis revealed a significantly lower failure rate for meniscal repair with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction compared with knees without any reported injury to the ACL (8.5% vs 14%; P = .043). The pooled failure rate for lateral meniscal repair was significantly lower than that for medial meniscal repair (6.1% vs 10.8%; P = .031). Pooled failure rates of all-inside and inside-out repair were not significantly different (11.9% vs 10.6%; P > .05). Conclusion: This meta-analysis on close to 4000 patients demonstrates an overall meniscal repair failure rate of 14.8% at a minimum follow-up from 2 years up to 5 years. Meniscal repair remains a procedure with a high failure rate, especially within the first 2 postoperative years. This review and meta-analysis also identified clinically relevant factors associated with favorable outcomes such as concomitant ACL reconstruction or repair of the lateral meniscus. All-inside meniscal repair with the latest-generation devices yields failure rates of <10%. The failure mechanism and the time of failure is poorly documented; further studies are needed for a better understanding of the retear mechanism.

Simultaneous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and implant-mediated guided growth to correct genu valgum in skeletally immature patients

ObjectivesAdolescents with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears can present with concomitant lower extremity coronal plane angular deformity (CPAD) that both predispose to injury as well as may increase the risk of graft rupture following ACL reconstruction (ACLR). The goal of this study was to examine the safety and efficacy of concomitant ACLR with implant-mediated guided growth (IMGG) compared to isolated IMGG procedures in paediatric and adolescent patients. MethodsOperative records of all paediatric and adolescent patients (age ≤ 18 years) that underwent simultaneous ACLR and IMGG by one of two paediatric orthopaedic surgeons between 2015 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. A comparison cohort of isolated IMGG patients was identified and matched based on bone age within one year, sex, laterality, and fixation type (i.e. transphyseal screw vs. tension band plate and screw construct). Pre- and post-operative mechanical axis deviation (MAD), angular axis deviation (AAD), lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), and medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) were recorded. ResultsA total of 9 participants who underwent concomitant ACLR and IMGG (ACLR ​+ ​IMGG) were identified, with 7 of these participants meeting the final inclusion criteria. The participants had a median age of 12.7 (IQR ​= ​12.1 – 14.2) years and median bone age of 13.0 (IQR ​= ​12.0 – 14.0) years. Of the 7 participants that underwent ACLR and IMGG, 3 underwent a modified MacIntosh procedure with ITB autograft, 2 received quadriceps tendon autograft, and 1 underwent hamstring autograft reconstruction. There were no significant differences in the amount of correction obtained between ACLR ​+ ​IMGG and matched IMGG subjects with respect to any measurement variable (MAD difference: p ​= ​0.47, AAD difference: p ​= ​0.58, LDFA difference: p ​= ​0.27, MPTA difference: p ​= ​0.20). There were also no significant differences in alignment variables per unit time between cohorts (MAD/month: p ​= ​0.62, AAD/month ​= ​0.80, LDFA/month ​= ​0.27, MPTA/month ​= ​0.20). ConclusionThe results of the current study indicate that concomitant ACLR and lower extremity CPAD correction is a safe approach to treat CPAD concomitantly with ACLR in young patients who present with an acute ACL tear. Furthermore, one can expect reliable correction of CPAD after combined ACLR and IMGG, no different than the correction obtained in the setting of IMGG alone. Level of evidenceIII.

Inferior Healing Rate in Isolated Meniscal Repair than that in Meniscal Repair with Concomitant ACL Reconstruction Evaluated with MRI.

Isolated meniscal repair has been suggested as one of the contributing factors in unhealed meniscal repair. The purpose of this study was to compare the healing rate between isolated meniscal repair and meniscal repair with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using a standardised assessment method after propensity score matching. Accuracy of the Crues' grading system for meniscal healing was validated using second-look arthroscopy as the reference standard in 17 patients. Propensity score matching (one-to-one) was performed between 26 patients who underwent isolated meniscal repair and 98 patients who underwent meniscal repair with concomitant ACLR. Patients were matched for sex, age, side and zone of the meniscal repair, and number of sutures. Healing rates at one year which were evaluated with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were compared between the two groups. The sensitivity and specificity of the Crues' grading system on multiple plane MRI for meniscal healing were 100% and 83.3%, respectively. Both the isolated meniscal repair group and the meniscal repair with concomitant ACLR group included 21 patients after propensity score matching. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. The healing rate was significantly lower in the isolated meniscal repairs group (14.3%) than in the meniscal repair concomitant with ACLR group (47.6%, P=0.04). The healing rate for isolated meniscal repair using a standardised MRI assessment method was inferior to that of meniscal repair with concomitant ACLR after propensity score matching.

Failure Rates of Repaired Bucket-Handle Tears of the Medial Meniscus Concomitant With Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Cohort Study of 253 Patients From the SANTI Study Group With a Mean Follow-up of 94 Months

Background: Failure rates of repaired bucket-handle medial meniscal tears (BHMMTs) concomitant with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are as high as 20%. The outcomes of posteromedial portal suture hook repair have not been compared with all-inside repair techniques for this subtype of meniscal lesion. Purpose/Hypothesis: The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and failure rates of patients who underwent BHMMT repair concomitant with ACLR using an all-inside technique, suture hook + all-inside technique, or suture hook + outside-in technique. It was hypothesized that no significant differences in failure rates would be found between the groups. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients diagnosed with a BHMMT who underwent meniscal repair during primary ACLR and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients were grouped based on the meniscal repair technique used: all-inside repair, suture hook + all-inside repair, or suture hook + outside-in repair. At the end of the study period, secondary medial meniscectomy rates were determined. Results: The study population comprised 253 patients who underwent repair of a BHMMT with concomitant ACLR with a mean follow-up of 94.0 ± 47.6 months. A total of 114 patients (45.1%) underwent all-inside repair, 61 patients (24.1%) underwent suture hook + all-inside repair, and 78 patients (30.8%) underwent suture hook + outside-in repair. Overall, there were 36 failures. The failure rates were 20.2%, 14.8%, and 5.1%, respectively (P = .0135). All-inside repairs were >4 times more likely to fail than suture hook + outside-in repairs (hazard ratio [HR], 4.103; 95% CI, 1.369-12.296; P = .0117). Failure was also 3 times higher (HR, 2.943; 95% CI, 1.224-7.075; P = .0159) for patients <30 years of age compared with those aged ≥30 years. An additional anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) was also found to reduce the failure rate of repaired BHMMTs concomitant with ACLR. Conclusion: Combined suture hook + outside-in repair of BHMMTs resulted in significantly fewer failures than all other techniques. Furthermore, age <30 years and no additional ALLR were associated with higher failure rates.

Acceptable clinical outcomes despite high reoperation rate at minimum 12-month follow-up after concomitant arthroscopically assisted anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and medial meniscal allograft transplantation

BackgroundSingle-stage medial meniscus allograft transplantation (MAT) with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a technically challenging procedure for management of knee pain and instability in younger patients, but clinical and functional outcomes data are sparse. The purpose of this study was to assess surgical and patient-reported outcomes following concomitant ACLR and medial MAT.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective case series of patients who underwent medial MAT with concomitant primary or revision ACLR at our institution from 2010 to 2021 and had minimum 12-month follow-up. Complications, reoperations, visual analog scale (VAS) pain, satisfaction, Lysholm score, return to sport, and return to work outcomes were assessed. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Interference, Pain Intensity, and Physical Function Scores were used to measure patients’ functional status relative to the US population. P-values < 0.05 were considered significant.ResultsThe cohort consisted of 17 knees of 16 individual patients. The cohort was majority male (82.4%) with mean age of 31.9 years (range 19–49 years) and mean body mass index (BMI) of 27.9 kg/m2 (range 22.5–53.3 kg/m2). Mean follow-up time was 56.8 months (range 13–106 months). Most patients underwent revision ACLR (64.7%). The 1-year reoperation rate was high (23.5%), with two patients (11.8%) tearing their meniscus graft. Patient-reported outcomes indicated low VAS pain (mean 2.2), high satisfaction (mean 77.9%), and fair Lysholm score (mean 81.1). Return to work rate was high (92.9%), while return to sport rate was low (42.9%). Postoperative PROMIS scores were comparable or superior to the national average and correlated significantly with patient satisfaction (p < 0.05).ConclusionsThe concomitant ACLR and MAT procedure is associated with excellent knee pain and functional outcomes and high rate of return to work after surgery, though the 1-year reoperation rate is high and rate of return to sport is low.Level of evidence: IV.

Clinical outcome and healing rate after meniscal bucket handle tear repair

BackgroundReports combining patient-reported outcome measures, clinical evaluation, and radiographic assessment of postoperative healing after arthroscopic repair of bucket-handle meniscal tears (BHMT) are scarce.MethodsPatients who underwent arthroscopic repair for acute traumatic BHMTs between October 2011 and March 2016 with a minimum follow-up of two years were included. Postoperative outcome scores comprised the International Knee Documentation Society Score (IKDC), Lysholm score, Tegner activity score (TAS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Clinical meniscal healing failure was assessed according to Barrett’s criteria. Side-to-side difference in knee laxity was measured using KT-2000. Radiographic healing was assessed by 3-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and classified according to Henning’s criteria at final follow-up.ResultsForty patients with a mean age of 32.0 ± 11.5 years were available for follow-up after 51.8 ± 14.3 months. Revision surgery by means of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy was performed in four patients (10%) prior to the follow-up visit. The clinical healing rate was 83.3% at final follow-up. Mean IKDC score was 82.8 ± 13.8 and Lysholm score was 77.4 ± 24.8. Of all patients, 87.5% reached or exceeded the patient-acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) criteria for the IKDC score at final follow-up. The median TAS was 6 and VAS for pain was 0.46 ± 0.9. Side-to-side difference in knee laxity was higher in patients with concomitant ACL reconstruction (2.1 ± 2.7 mm) compared to isolated BHMTs (1.0 ± 2.0 mm). MR examination showed 69.4% healed, 25.0% partially healed, and 5.6% unhealed menisci.ConclusionPatients who underwent repair for acute traumatic BHMTs achieved good to excellent clinical outcome along with a high rate of meniscal healing at a minimum follow-up of two years. Clinical and radiological healing rates were similarly satisfactory and most patients exceeded the PASS criteria for the IKDC score. Patients were able to reach a high postoperative activity level.Level of evidenceCase Series; IV.

Poster 246: Comparison of Meniscectomy versus Repair in Bucket Handle Meniscus Tears: Analysis of a Large, Contained Cohort Study

Objectives:o evaluate the long-term risk of subsequent ipsilateral knee surgery in patients who underwent a bucket handle meniscus repair (BHMR) versus meniscectomy and assess risk factors associated with subsequent knee surgical intervention.Methods:We performed an electronic health records search for all patients who underwent arthroscopic knee meniscus surgery (repair and meniscectomy) from 2011 to 2018. Natural language processing was used to search for terms of interest in the long operative notes to determine if these surgeries were performed for bucket handle meniscus tears. These patients comprised our initial cohort. Study subjects were followed for at least one year and up to five years with censoring at death, membership disenrollment, or 12/31/2019. Baseline patient characteristics and outcomes (i.e., subsequent operative procedures, deep surgical site infections, and deep venous thrombosis) were evaluated via a database review. The primary outcome was subsequent ipsilateral knee surgeries and secondary outcomes included contralateral knee surgeries, deep surgical site infections, and venous thrombotic events. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to model for subsequent surgical treatment of the ipsilateral knee. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. We then performed a subset analysis for patients 30-50 years-old.Results:The mean follow-up time was 3.9 years (standard deviation [SD] 1.3 years). A total of 1359 patients underwent meniscus repair and 1537 patients underwent meniscectomy for a bucket-handle meniscus tear. The mean age was 27 (SD 10.9) years for the repair group versus 37.5 (SD 13.1) for the meniscectomy group (P<0.001). BMI was significantly lower in the meniscus repair compared to the meniscectomy group (P<0.001). BHMR was significantly more likely to be performed during a concomitant ipsilateral ACL reconstruction than a meniscectomy (44.2% vs 30.1%, P<0.001). During the follow-up period, a total of 656 subsequent ipsilateral procedures were performed in 393 (13.6%) patients. Patient who underwent initial BHMR were at a significantly higher risk to undergo subsequent meniscus repair (4.3% vs 1%, P<0.001), meniscus debridement (12.1% vs 3.3%, P<0.001), and ACL reconstruction (7.4% vs 2.9%, P<0.001) compared to initial meniscectomy. Multivariate analysis showed that BHMR, younger age, and lower BMI were risk factors in subsequent ipsilateral surgery. After adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics, subset analysis showed for age 30-50 year-old patients, undergoing a BHMR versus a meniscectomy led to a 2.3-times higher risk of subsequent surgery, with a 5.3-times higher risk of subsequent meniscus repair and a 3.2-times risk of subsequent meniscectomy.Conclusions:BHMR is more often performed in younger, lower BMI individuals especially during a concomitant ACL reconstruction. BHMR are more likely to undergo subsequent surgeries which decreases with regards to increasing age. Subset analyses showed increasing risk for subsequent surgeries with BHMR versus meniscectomy in the age 30-50 years-old cohort.