Swedish National Knee Ligament Registries Research Articles

A High Grade of Postoperative Knee Laxity Is Associated With an Increased Hazard of Revision Surgery: A Cohort Study of 4697 Patients With Primary ACL Reconstruction

Background: There is still debate regarding the association between arthrometric knee laxity measurements and subjective knee outcome and revision surgery after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Purpose: To assess whether arthrometric knee laxity (measured with the KT-1000 arthrometer) 6 months after primary ACLR was associated with the 1-, 2-, and 5-year subjective knee outcomes or revision ACLR at a 5-year follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study, Level of evidence 3. Methods: Patients who underwent primary ACLR with a hamstring tendon autograft at the authors’ institution between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2017, with no concomitant ligamentous injuries, were identified. Anterior knee laxity (KT-1000 arthrometer, 134 N) was assessed 6 months postoperatively. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was collected preoperatively and 1, 2, and 5 years postoperatively. Patients who underwent revision ACLR at any institution in the country within 5 years of primary surgery were identified through the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry. Results: A total of 4697 patients (54.3% male) with available KT-1000 arthrometer measurements were included (normal: side-to-side [STS] ≤2 mm, 3015 [64.2%]; nearly normal: STS 3-5 mm, 1446 [30.8%]; abnormal: STS >5 mm, 236 [5.0%]). The only significant difference in subjective knee outcome between the groups was for the KOOS Symptoms subscale at the 1-year follow-up (STS ≤2 mm, 79.9 ± 16.2; STS 3-5 mm, 82.5 ± 14.8; STS >5 mm, 85.1 ± 14.2; P < .001). No other significant differences between the groups were found preoperatively or at 1, 2, or 5 years postoperatively for any of the KOOS subscales. The hazard for revision ACLR within 5 years of the primary surgery was significantly higher for the groups with an STS of 3 to 5 mm (6.6%; 95/1446) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.42; 95% CI, 1.07-1.87; P = .01) and an STS >5 mm (11.4%; 27/236) (HR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.69-4.03; P < .001) compared with the group with an STS ≤2 mm (3.8%; 116/3015). Conclusion: A high grade of postoperative knee laxity (STS 3-5 mm and STS >5 mm) 6 months after primary ACLR was associated with an increased hazard of revision ACLR within 5 years, but it was not associated with an inferior subjective knee outcome.

Influence of Surgeon Experience and Clinic Volume on Subjective Knee Function and Revision Rates in Primary ACL Reconstruction: A Study from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry.

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) performed by high-volume surgeons/clinics has been associated with increased graft individualization and decreased operating times, complication rates, and total costs. To investigate the influence of surgeon/clinic volume on subjective knee function and revision surgery rates at 2 years after primary ACLR. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry were used to study patients who underwent primary ACLR between 2008 and 2019. Surgeons/clinics were categorized based on a combination of total caseload volume (cutoff: 50 ACLRs/surgeon, 500 ACLRs/clinic) and annual volume (cutoff: 29 ACLRs/year/surgeon, 56 ACLRs/year/clinic). The thresholds of minimal important change (MIC), Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS), and treatment failure (TF) relative to the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and KOOS4 (mean score of the KOOS Pain, Symptoms, Sports/Rec, and QoL subscales) were applied. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess variables influencing the MIC, PASS, or TF of the KOOS and KOOS4. Adjusted Cox regression analysis was conducted to determine the hazard ratio of subsequent ACLR. Of 35,371 patients, 16,317 had 2-year follow-up outcome data and were included. Patients who underwent primary ACLR by high-volume surgeons had significantly higher MIC and PASS rates and lower TF rates when compared with patients who underwent the procedure by low-volume surgeons: MICKOOS4: 70.6% vs 66.3%; PASSKOOS4: 46.0% versus 38.3%; and TFKOOS4: 8.7% versus 11.8% (all P < .02). Significantly decreased odds of achieving MICKOOS4 (OR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.62-0.88) and PASSKOOS4 (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.60-0.84) were found for ACLRs performed by low-volume surgeons. Clinic volume did not influence the odds of reaching MIC, PASS, or TF. Overall, 804 patients (2.3%) underwent subsequent ACLR at <2 years, with significantly higher revision rates among patients operated on at high-volume clinics (2.5% vs 1.7%; P < .001). However, in the adjusted Cox regression, surgeon/clinic volume had no influence on subsequent ACLR rates. High-volume surgeons/clinics had decreased time to surgery, operating time, perioperative complication rates, and use of thromboprophylaxis and nonroutine antibiotics (P < .001). Patients who underwent primary ACLR by high-volume surgeons experienced increased improvement and satisfaction regarding subjective knee function. Factors other than surgical volume influenced subsequent surgery rates. Patients might benefit from undergoing primary ACLR by high-volume providers.

Metal interference screw fixation combinations show high revision rates in primary hamstring tendon ACL reconstruction

BackgroundDifferent fixation methods in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) have been associated with different revision rates, specifically in the early postoperative period. However, most previous research has either grouped together different fixation types or evaluated femoral-sided fixation or tibial-sided fixation separately. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine ACL revision rates for specific combinations of femoral and tibial fixation methods within 2 years of primary hamstring tendon autograft ACLR based on data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry (SNKLR).MethodsPatients that underwent primary hamstring tendon autograft ACLR between 2005 and 2018 in the SNKLR were included. The collected data included patient characteristics (age, sex, body mass index [BMI]), activity at time of injury, surgical information (concomitant injuries, time from injury to surgery, fixation types at the femur and tibia), and subsequent revision ACLR. Revision rate within 2 years of the index procedure was chosen, as ACLR fixation is most likely to contribute to ACLR revision within the first 2 years, during graft maturation.ResultsOf the 23,238 included patients undergoing primary hamstring ACLR, 581 (2.5%) underwent revision ACLR within 2 years of the index procedure. Among the combinations used for > 300 patients, the femoral metal interference screw/tibial metal interference screw fixation combination had the highest revision rate followed by metal interference screw/resorbable screw and Endobutton/AO screw fixation combinations, with respective revision rates of 4.0, 3.0, and 3.0%. The lowest revision rate within 2 years of ACLR was found in the Endobutton/metal interference screw with backup Osteosuture fixation combination, used in 433 cases, with a failure rate of 0.9%.ConclusionDifferent early ACL revision rates were found across different combinations of femoral and tibial fixation devices within 2 years of primary hamstring tendon autograft ACLR. Metal interference screw fixation, particularly when performed on both the femoral and tibial sides, most frequently resulted in revision ACLR. These findings may be helpful for surgeons in selecting appropriate fixation devices for hamstring ACLR.Level of evidenceIV

THE COURSE OF SEPTIC ARTHRITIS FOLLOWING ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION: INFECTIOUS AGENTS, CLINICAL PRESENTATION, AND TREATMENT: A CASE SERIES OF 158 PATIENTS

Septic arthritis following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a rare and serious complication. Previous studies have shown that septic arthritis is associated with inferior outcome of ACLR. Despite that, there is no standardized treatment protocol, and the course of the disease has mainly been studied within single institutions with a small number of patients.The aim of the present study is to describe the course of septic arthritis following ACLR in a large nationwide cohort. The hypothesis was that the clinical presentation of septic arthritis following ACLR varies according to the infectious agent.The present cohort represents patients with septic arthritis identified in a previous study that analyzed compensation claims reported to the Swedish national insurance company (Löf) in 2005–2014 (1). The diagnosis was confirmed by medical experts at Löf after review of medical records. We conducted a comprehensive analysis of the medical records as well as data available from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry (SNKLR) for the study group.The study involved 158 patients who received compensation due to developing septic arhtirits. 94 (59.9%) patients were infected with Coagulase negative staphylococci (CoNS), and 25 patients by Staphyolococcus Aureus (S.Aureus) (15.9%). There was a significant difference between the groups regarding Maximum CRP (p&lt;0.001), and duration between ACLR and first washout operation (p&lt;0.005). S.aureus group had the higest maximum CRP (281) and the shortest duration between ACLR and first washout operation (12 days).The Clinical presentation of septic arthritis following ACLR can vary according to the agent causing the infection, and low virulent agents are responsible for the majority of the infections. Clinicians need to be aware of these differences and consider them when making diagnosis or treatment decisions.

Comparison of Improvement in Patient-Reported Knee Function After Revision and Multiple-Revision ACL Reconstruction Compared With Primary ACL Reconstruction.

Graft failure after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a debilitating complication often requiring revision surgery. It is widely agreed upon that functional knee outcomes after revision ACLR (r-ACLR) are inferior compared with those after primary reconstruction. However, data are scarce on outcomes after multiple-revision ACLR (mr-ACLR). To compare patient-reported knee function in terms of Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively after primary ACLR, r-ACLR, and mr-ACLR and evaluate the pre- to postoperative improvement in KOOS scores for each procedure. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Patients from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry who underwent their index ACLR between 2005 and 2020 with a minimum age of 15 years at the time of surgery were included in this study. All patients had pre- and postoperative KOOS data. The 1-year postoperative KOOS and the pre- to postoperative changes in KOOS were assessed between patients who underwent primary ACLR and those who underwent subsequent r-ACLR and mr-ACLR. Of 20,542 included patients, 19,769 (96.2%) underwent primary ACLR, 760 (3.7%) underwent r-ACLR, and 13 (0.06%) underwent mr-ACLR. Patients who underwent r-ACLR had significantly smaller pre- to postoperative changes on all KOOS subscales compared with patients undergoing primary ACLR (P < .0001 for all). Furthermore, patients in the mr-ACLR group had significantly smaller changes in the KOOS-Pain subscale compared with patients in the r-ACLR group (-9 ± 23.3 vs 2.5 ± 18; P = .024). The study results indicated that while improvement is seen after primary ACLR, r-ACLR, and mr-ACLR, the greatest improvement in functional outcomes is observed after primary ACLR. Patients who underwent at least 1 r-ACLR, specifically mr-ACLR, had lower postoperative outcome scores, indicating that primary ACLR may provide the best chance for recovery after ACL injury.

The Addition of the Gracilis Tendon to a Semitendinosus Tendon Autograft Is Not Associated With Knee Muscle Strength, Subjective Knee Function, or Revision Surgery After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

PurposeTo evaluate and compare isokinetic knee muscle (extension and flexion) strength, single-leg-hop (SLH) test performance, anterior knee laxity, subjective knee function and the 2-year revision surgery risk between patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) with a semitendinosus tendon autograft (ST) or a semitendinosus and gracilis tendon autograft (ST+G). MethodsPatients aged 16 years or older who underwent primary ACLR with a hamstring tendon autograft at our institution from January 2005 to December 2020, with no associated ligament injuries, were identified. Isokinetic knee muscle strength and SLH test performance were assessed 6 months postoperatively. Anterior knee laxity (KT-1000 arthrometer, 134-N) was assessed preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was collected preoperatively and 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Patients who underwent revision ACLR at any institution in the country within 2 years of primary surgery were identified through the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry. ResultsA total of 6,974 patients (5,479 ST and 1,495 ST+G) were included. There were no significant differences in extension and flexion strength or SLH test performance between the groups. Preoperatively, there was no significant difference in knee laxity between the ST and ST+G groups. Postoperatively, the ST+G group had a significantly increased mean side-to-side (STS) laxity (2.1 ± 2.3 mm vs 1.7 ± 2.2 mm; P <.001) and showed a trend towards an increased STS laxity according to the IKDC form, with significantly fewer patients with an STS laxity of ≤ 2 mm (58.4% vs 65.8%) and significantly more patients with an STS laxity of between 3 and 5 mm (35.0% vs 29.9%) or > 5 mm (6.6% vs 4.3%) (P < .001). The only significant difference in subjective knee function was for the KOOS Quality of Life score in favor of the ST group preoperatively (37.3 ± 21.4 vs 35.1 ± 19.9; P = .001). No other significant differences between the groups were found preoperatively and 1 and 2 years postoperatively for any of the KOOS subscales. The overall revision ACLR rate within 2 years of primary surgery was 2.0% (138/6,974). The revision ACLR risk for the ST+G group (1.7%; 25/1,495) was not significantly different from that of the ST group (2.1%; 113/5,479) (Hazard Ratio [HR] 0.80; 95%, CI, 0.50-1.24; P = .32). ConclusionThe addition of the gracilis tendon to an ST autograft was not associated with knee muscle strength, SLH test performance, subjective knee function or the risk of revision surgery after ACLR. Level of EvidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study

Differences in postoperative knee function based on concomitant treatment of lateral meniscal injury in the setting of primary ACL reconstruction

BackgroundConcomitant lateral meniscal (LM) injuries are common in acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures. However, the effect of addressing these injuries with various treatment methods during primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare postoperative Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 2-, 5-, and 10-years after isolated primary ACLR to primary ACLR with various treatment methods to address concomitant LM injury.MethodsThis study was based on data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry. Patients ≥ 15 years with data on postoperative KOOS who underwent primary ACLR between the years 2005 and 2018 were included in this study. The study population was divided into five groups: 1) Isolated ACLR, 2) ACLR + LM repair, 3) ACLR + LM resection, 4) ACLR + LM injury left in situ, and 5) ACLR + LM repair + LM resection. Patients with concomitant medial meniscal or other surgically treated ligament injuries were excluded.ResultsOf 31,819 included patients, 24% had LM injury. After post hoc comparisons, significantly lower scores were found for the KOOS Symptoms subscale in ACLR + LM repair group compared to isolated ACLR (76.0 vs 78.3, p = 0.0097) and ACLR + LM injury left in situ groups (76.0 vs 78.3, p = 0.041) at 2-year follow-up. However, at 10-year follow-up, no differences were found between ACLR + LM repair and isolated ACLR, but ACLR + LM resection resulted in significantly lower KOOS Symptoms scores compared to isolated ACLR (80.4 vs 82.3, p = 0.041).ConclusionThe results of this study suggest that LM injury during ACLR is associated with lower KOOS scores, particularly in the Symptoms subscale, at short- and long-term follow-up. However, this finding falls below minimal clinical important difference and therefore may not be clinically relevant.Level of EvidenceIII.

Effect of Concomitant Lateral Meniscal Management on ACL Reconstruction Revision Rate and Secondary Meniscal and Cartilaginous Injuries

Background: Simultaneous meniscal tears are often present with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries, and in the acute setting, the lateral meniscus (LM) is more commonly injured than the medial meniscus. Purpose: To investigate how a concomitant LM injury, repaired, resected, or left in situ during primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR), affects the ACL revision rate and cartilaginous and meniscal status at the time of revision within 2 years after the primary ACLR. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data for 31,705 patients with primary ACLR, extracted from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry, were used. The odds of revision ACLR, and cartilaginous as well as meniscal injuries at the time of revision ACLR, were assessed between the unexposed comparison group (isolated ACLR) and the exposed groups of interest (ACLR + LM repair, ACLR + LM resection, ACLR + LM repair + LM resection, or ACLR + LM injury left in situ). Results: In total, 719 (2.5%) of the included 29,270 patients with 2 years follow-up data underwent revision ACLR within 2 years after the primary ACLR. No significant difference in revision rate was found between the groups. Patients with concomitant LM repair (OR, 3.56; 95% CI, 1.57-8.10; P = .0024) or LM resection (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.18-2.62; P = .0055) had higher odds of concomitant meniscal injuries (medial or lateral) at the time of revision ACLR than patients undergoing isolated primary ACLR. Additionally, higher odds of concomitant cartilage injuries at the time of revision ACLR were found in patients with LM resection at index ACLR compared with patients undergoing isolated primary ACLR (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.14-2.63; P = .010). Conclusion: The results of this study demonstrated higher odds of meniscal and cartilaginous injuries at the time of revision ACLR within 2 years after primary ACLR + LM resection and higher odds of meniscal injury at the time of revision ACLR within 2 years after primary ACLR + LM repair compared with isolated ACLR. Surgeons should be aware of the possibility of concomitant cartilaginous and meniscal injuries at the time of revision ACLR after index ACLR with concomitant LM injury, regardless of the index treatment type received.

Improved Subjective Knee Function if Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Conducted by Experienced Surgeons: A Study from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry

Improved Subjective Knee Function if Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Conducted by Experienced Surgeons: A Study from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry

Only 10% of Patients With a Concomitant MCL Injury Return to Their Preinjury Level of Sport 1 Year After ACL Reconstruction: A Matched Comparison With Isolated ACL Reconstruction.

There is a need for an increased understanding of the way a concomitant medial collateral ligament (MCL) injury may influence outcome after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Patients with a concomitant MCL injury would have inferior clinical outcomes compared with a matched cohort of patients undergoing ACL reconstruction without an MCL injury. Matched registry-based cohort study; case-control. Level 3. Data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry and a local rehabilitation outcome registry were utilized. Patients who had undergone a primary ACL reconstruction with a concomitant nonsurgically treated MCL injury (ACL + MCL group) were matched with patients who had undergone an ACL reconstruction without an MCL injury (ACL group), in a 1:3 ratio. The primary outcome was return to knee-strenuous sport, defined as a Tegner activity scale ≥6, at the 1-year follow-up. In addition, return to preinjury level of sport, muscle function tests, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were compared between the groups. The ACL + MCL group comprised 30 patients, matched with 90 patients in the ACL group. At the 1-year follow-up, 14 patients (46.7%) in the ACL + MCL group had return to sport (RTS) compared with 44 patients (48.9%) in the ACL group (P = 0.37). A significantly lower proportion of patients in the ACL + MCL group had returned to their preinjury level of sport compared with the ACL group (10.0% compared with 25.6%, adjusted P = 0.01). No differences were found between the groups across a battery of strength and hop tests or in any of the assessed PROs. The ACL + MCL group reported a mean 1-year ACL-RSI after injury of 59.4 (SD 21.6), whereas the ACL group reported 57.9 (SD 19.4), P = 0.60. Patients with a concomitant nonsurgically treated MCL injury did not return to their preinjury level of sport to the same extent as patients without an MCL injury 1 year after ACL reconstruction. However, there was no difference between the groups in terms of return to knee strenuous activity, muscle function, or PROs. Patients with a concomitant nonsurgically treated MCL injury may reach outcomes similar to those of patients without an MCL injury 1 year after an ACL reconstruction. However, few patients return to their preinjury level of sport at 1 year.

When ACL reconstruction does not help: risk factors associated with not achieving the minimal important change for the KOOS Sport/Rec and QoL

ObjectivesTo determine factors associated with not achieving a minimal important change (MIC) in the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Function in Sport and Recreation (Sport/Rec), and Knee-Related Quality...

Different patient and activity-related characteristics result in different injury profiles for patients with anterior cruciate ligament and posterior cruciate ligament injuries

PurposeTo compare patient characteristics including patient sex, age, body mass index (BMI), activities at the time of injury and injury profiles in patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injuries.MethodsData were obtained from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry. Two study groups were created: (1) index ACL reconstruction (ACL group) and (2) index PCL reconstruction (PCL group). Between-group differences were investigated using Fisher’s exact test and Fisher’s non-parametric permutation test for dichotomous variables and continuous variables, respectively.ResultsOf 39,010 patients, 38,904 were ACL injuries. A larger proportion of patients with combined injuries to the PCL, meniscus and cartilage were female, aged > 25 years and with a BMI of > 35 kg/m2 compared with patients with combined injuries to the ACL, meniscus and cartilage. An isolated ACL injury was more commonly found in males, while all other injury profiles of ACL, including combined injuries with meniscus, cartilage and collateral ligament injuries, were more frequently observed in females. The PCL injuries were sustained either during pivoting sports, non-pivoting sports or were traffic-related.ConclusionDifferent patient characteristics (BMI, age and sex), and activities at the time of injury (sport- versus traffic-related activities), resulted in distinct injury profiles for the ACL and PCL groups. These findings provide valuable information of the way specific injury patterns of cruciate ligament injuries occur, and subsequently may help clinicians with the diagnostic process of ACL and PCL injuries.Level of evidenceIII.

Surgeon’s experience, sports participation and a concomitant MCL injury increase the use of patellar and quadriceps tendon grafts in primary ACL reconstruction: a nationwide registry study of 39,964 surgeries

PurposeTo investigate the influence of surgeon-related factors and clinic routines on autograft choice in primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).MethodsData from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry (SNKLR), 2008–2019, were used to study autograft choice (hamstring; HT, patellar; PT, or quadriceps tendon; QT) in primary ACLR. Patient/injury characteristics (sex, age at surgery, activity at time of injury and associated injuries) and surgeon-/clinic-related factors (operating volume, caseload and graft type use) were analyzed. Surgeon/clinic volume was divided into tertiles (low-, mid- and high-volume categories). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess variables influencing autograft choice in 2015–2019, presented as the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).Results39,964 primary ACLRs performed by 299 knee surgeons in 91 clinics were included. Most patients received HT (93.7%), followed by PT (4.2%) and QT (2.1%) grafts. Patients were mostly operated on by high-volume (> 28 ACLRs/year) surgeons (68.1%), surgeons with a caseload of ≥ 50 ACLRs (85.1%) and surgeons with the ability to use ≥ two autograft types (85.9%) (all p < 0.001). Most patients underwent ACLR at high-volume (> 55 ACLRs/year) clinics (72.2%) and at clinics capable of using ≥ two autograft types (93.1%) (both p < 0.001). Significantly increased odds of receiving PT/QT autografts were found for ACLR by surgeons with a caseload of ≥ 50 ACLRs (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.11–1.79), but also for injury during handball (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.02–1.67), various other pivoting sports (basketball, hockey, rugby and American football) (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.24–2.03) and a concomitant medial collateral ligament (MCL) injury (OR 4.93, 95% CI 4.18–5.80). In contrast, female sex (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77–0.97), injury during floorball (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55–0.91) and ACLR by mid-volume relative to high-volume surgeons (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.53–0.73) had significantly reduced odds of receiving PT/QT autografts.ConclusionAn HT autograft was used in the vast majority of cases, but PT/QT autografts were used more frequently by experienced surgeons. Prior research has demonstrated significant differences in autograft characteristics. For this reason, patients might benefit if surgery is performed by more experienced surgeons.Level of evidenceLevel III.

Sports activity and quality of life improve after isolated ACL, isolated PCL, and combined ACL/PCL reconstruction

PurposeTo compare patient-reported outcomes following isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R), isolated posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (PCL-R), and combined ACL-R and PCL-R (ACL/PCL-R), at a minimum follow-up of 2 years.MethodsThis was a prospective observational registry cohort study based on the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry. Patients undergoing isolated ACL-R, isolated PCL-R, and combined ACL/PCL-R between 2005 and 2019 were eligible for inclusion. Demographic characteristics as well as injury- and surgery-related data were queried from the SNKLR. To evaluate functional outcomes, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was collected preoperatively and at 1- and 2-year follow-ups and compared between the treatment groups.ResultsIn total, 45,169 patients underwent isolated ACL-R, 192 patients isolated PCL-R, and 203 patients combined ACL/PCL-R. Preoperatively, and at the 1- and 2-year follow-ups, KOOS subscales were highest for the isolated ACL-R group, followed by the isolated PCL-R, and lowest for the combined ACL/PCL-R groups. Significant improvements were observed across all treatment groups in the majority of KOOS subscales between the preoperative, and 1- and 2-year follow-ups. All treatment groups showed the greatest improvements between the preoperative and 2-year follow-ups in the knee-related quality of life (mean improvement: isolated ACL-R, + 28 points; isolated PCL-R, + 23 points; combined ACL/PCL-R, + 21 points) and the function in sport and recreation (mean improvement: isolated ACL-R, + 26 points; isolated PCL-R, + 20 points; combined ACL/PCL-R, + 19 points) subscales.ConclusionClinically relevant improvements in knee function can be expected after isolated ACL-R, isolated PCL-R, and combined ACL/PCL-R. Functional improvements were particularly pronounced in the KOOS function in sport and recreation subscale, indicating the importance of knee stability for sports activity. This study facilitates more comprehensive patient education about functional expectations after surgical treatment of isolated and combined ACL and PCL injuries.Level of evidenceLevel 2.

Greater proportion of patients report an acceptable symptom state after ACL reconstruction compared with non-surgical treatment: a 10-year follow-up from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry

ObjectivesTo compare the proportion of patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury reporting an acceptable symptom state, between non-surgical and surgical treatment during a 10-year follow-up.MethodsData were extracted from the...

Different injury patterns exist among patients undergoing operative treatment of isolated PCL, combined PCL/ACL, and isolated ACL injuries: a study from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry

PurposeTo compare demographic characteristics and concomitant injury patterns in patients undergoing primary isolated posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (PCL-R) and combined posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (PCL-R/ACL-R) with isolated ACL reconstruction (ACL-R) as a reference using data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry (SNKLR).MethodsThis cohort study based on the SNKLR comprised patients undergoing either PCL-R, ACL-R, or combined PCL-R/ACL-R between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2019 in Sweden. Demographic and surgery-related data with regards to injury mechanism, concomitant intraarticular lesions and their treatment, neurovascular damage, and concomitant ligamentous injuries were extracted. Exclusion criteria included concomitant fractures of the femur, fibula, patella or tibia, and quadriceps or patellar tendon injury.ResultsA total of 45,564 patients were included in this study. Isolated PCL-R, combined PCL-R/ACL-R, and isolated ACL-R were performed in 192 (0.4%), 203 (0.5%) and 45,169 (99.1%) patients, respectively. Sports were identified as the cause of 64% of PCL-Rs, 54% of PCL-R/ACL-Rs, and 89% of ACL-Rs, while a traffic-related mechanism was identified in 20% of PCL-Rs, 27% of PCL-R/ACL-Rs and 2% of ACL-Rs. Meniscus injury prevalence was 45% in ACL-Rs, 31% in PCL-R/ACL-Rs and 16% in isolated PCL-Rs (p < 0.001). Cartilage injuries were more common in PCL-R (37%) and PCL-R/ACL-R patients (40%) compared to ACL-R patients (26%, p < 0.001). Concomitant knee ligament injury was identified in 28–44% of PCL-R/ACL-R patients. Neurovascular injuries were present in 9% of PCL-R/ACL-Rs, 1% of PCL-Rs, and 0.3% of ACL-Rs (p < 0.001).ConclusionDifferences in injury mechanisms among patient groups confirm that operatively treated PCL tears are frequently caused by both traffic and sports. Cartilage and ligament injuries were more frequent in patients with PCL-R compared to ACL-R. Consequently, combined PCL and ACL tears should raise suspicion for concomitant knee lesions with clinical relevance during the operative treatment of these complex injuries.Level of evidenceIII.

Superior Outcome of Early ACL Reconstruction versus Initial Non-reconstructive Treatment With Late Crossover to Surgery: A Study From the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry

Background: Although comparable clinical and functional outcomes have been reported after nonsurgical and surgical anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) treatment, few studies have investigated the effects of early versus late ACL reconstruction with initial rehabilitation. Purpose: To determine patient-reported knee function in patients who initially undergo nonreconstructive treatment after an ACL injury but who later choose to undergo ACL reconstruction as compared with (1) patients undergoing ACL reconstruction close to the index injury and (2) patients treated nonreconstructively at 1 to 10 years of follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Results from the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) were extracted from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry for patients treated with nonreconstruction, early ACL reconstruction, and initial nonreconstruction but subsequent ACL reconstruction (crossover group). The KOOS4 (a mean of 4 KOOS subscales) was analyzed cross-sectionally at baseline and at the 1-, 2-, 5-, and 10-year follow-ups. Additionally, the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) was applied to all KOOS subscales from baseline to the 10-year follow-up. Results: A total of 1,074 crossover, 484 nonreconstruction, and 20,352 early ACL reconstruction cases were included. The crossover group reported lower KOOS4 values than the group undergoing early ACL reconstruction at baseline and at all follow-ups (mean difference [95% CI]): baseline, −6.5 (−8.0 to −5.0); 1 year, −9.3 (−10.9 to −7.7); 2 years, −4.8 (−6.3 to −3.2); 5 years, −6.1 (−8.8 to −3.4); and 10 years, −10.9 (−16.3 to −5.2). Additionally, a smaller proportion of the crossover cohort achieved a PASS on KOOS subscales at baseline and through the 1-, 2-, 5-, and 10-year follow-ups as compared with the early ACL reconstruction cohort. No differences were observed between crossover and nonreconstruction cases on either the KOOS4 or the PASS at any follow-up. Conclusion: A greater proportion of patients treated with early ACL reconstruction reported acceptable knee function and superior overall knee function as compared with patients who decided to cross over from nonreconstructive treatment to ACL reconstruction.

Adolescents Have Twice the Revision Rate of Young Adults After ACL Reconstruction With Hamstring Tendon Autograft: A Study From the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry.

Background:Previous studies have identified young age as a risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision. However, few studies have looked separately at pediatric patients and adolescents with regard to outcomes after ACL reconstruction.Purpose:To determine whether patient age at ACL reconstruction affects the risk of undergoing revision surgery in young patients.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:This study was based on data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry. Patients aged 5 to 35 years who underwent a primary ACL reconstruction with a hamstring tendon autograft between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2015, were included. The cohort was stratified into different age groups of pediatric patients, adolescents, and young adults to estimate patients with open, recently closed, and closed epiphyses, respectively. The primary endpoint was ACL revision. A multivariable Cox regression model was used to assess the ACL revision rate. The results were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs.Results:A total of 36,274 ACL reconstructions were registered during the study period. Of these, 2848 patients were included in the study: 47 pediatric patients (mean age, 13.6 years; range, 9-15 years), 522 adolescents (mean age, 17.4; range, 14-19 years), and 2279 young adults (mean age, 27.0; range, 20-35 years). A total of 31 patients (1.1%) underwent ACL revision within 2 years (0 pediatric patients, 9 adolescents [1.7%], and 22 young adults [1.0%]) and a total of 53 patients (2.6%) underwent ACL revision within 5 years (2 pediatric patients [6.9%], 15 adolescents [3.9%], and 36 young adults [2.2%]). The adolescent age group had a 1.91 times higher rate of ACL revision compared with the young adults (HR = 1.91 [95% CI, 1.13-3.21]; P = .015). There were no differences in revision rates between the pediatric age group and the young adults (HR = 2.93 [95% CI, 0.88-9.79]; P = .081).Conclusion:Adolescents had almost twice the rate of revision ACL reconstruction compared with young adults.

Effect of Concomitant Meniscal Lesions and Meniscal Surgery in ACL Reconstruction With 5-Year Follow-Up: A Nationwide Prospective Cohort Study From Norway and Sweden of 8408 Patients.

Background:Increased knowledge of the factors predicting outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is needed.Purpose:To determine the effect of concomitant meniscal lesions, and the surgical management thereof, on patient-reported outcomes 5 years after ACLR.Study Design:Prospective cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.Methods:A total of 15,706 patients who underwent primary unilateral ACLR between 2005 and 2008 were enrolled prospectively and evaluated longitudinally. All patients were part of the Norwegian and Swedish national knee ligament registries. Outcomes at 5-year follow-up were evaluated with the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). A multivariable linear regression model was used to assess possible effects on prognosis, as measured by KOOS, of a concomitant meniscal lesion and its associated surgical treatment.Results:At a mean follow-up of 5.1 ± 0.2 years, KOOS data were available from 8408 patients: 4774 (57%) patients with no and 3634 (43%) patients with concomitant meniscal lesions (mean patient age, 33.8 ± 10.7 years). Patients with concomitant meniscal lesions reported equal crude mean scores compared with patients without meniscal lesions in all KOOS subscales 5 years after ACLR. The mean improvement in scores from preoperative to the 5-year follow-up was greater for patients with a concomitant meniscal lesion for the KOOS Pain, Activities of Daily Living (ADL), and Sport and Recreation subscales. In the adjusted regression analyses, using patients without concomitant meniscal lesions as the reference, neither no treatment nor resection or repair of medial meniscal lesions were significantly associated with KOOS scores 5 years after ACLR. Except for the ADL subscale, in which a repaired lateral meniscal lesion was associated with better outcome, no significant associations between any of the lateral meniscal lesion treatment categories and KOOS outcome at 5-year follow-up were identified.Conclusion:Concomitant meniscal lesions at the time of ACLR conferred no negative effects on patient-reported outcomes 5 years after ACLR. The improvement in selected KOOS subscales from preoperative to the 5-year follow-up was significantly greater for patients with concomitant meniscal lesions than for patients without such lesions.

Gymnasts' experiences and perception of a cruciate ligament injury.

Gymnastics is a high injury risk sport including difficult technique. A cruciate ligament injury is common, though there are no evidence-based guidelines for return to gymnastics. The gymnasts' experiences may add specificity to a guideline. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to describe the gymnasts' experiences and perception of a cruciate ligament injury. An embedded mixed methods design. Semi-structured interviews in 14 gymnasts between March and August 2018. The gymnasts represented a variation in age, sex, discipline, level of gymnastics, re- ruptures, associated injuries and return to gymnastics. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, compared with age matched cruciate ligament injured gymnasts in the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry, and the Tegner's Activity Score were supplements to the interviews. The interviews covered injury occasion, rehabilitation, return to gymnastics and current experience of the knee joint and were analyzed using qualitative content analysis with an inductive approach. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score was consistent with the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry and showed low levels in the subscales Quality of Life and sports/recreation. One third reported Tegner's Score <6 supporting low levels in Sports/Recreation. The text analysis resulted in two parts "This really happened, cold facts" and "Prerequisites and hindrances for return to gymnastics." The gymnasts' narratives were similar and reached saturation. A cruciate ligament injury is a large trauma, and the physical and psychological demands must be understood. The results of the present study may be included in a framework for return to gymnastics, where the individual prerequisites and goals should be determined. The timeline within this framework would depend on the extent of the injury, expected time for healing and physical as well as psychological demands with respect to gymnastics' level. It may also include suggestions for different psychological strategies and performance enhancement techniques to increase the gymnasts' self-efficacy and encourage and motivate the gymnasts through the long and demanding rehabilitation.