Anterolateral ligament reconstruction improves the clinical and functional outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in athletes.

PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with those of combined ACL and anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction in ACL-deficient knees. The objective of this study was to improve knowledge regarding the treatment of ACL-deficient knees with combined ACL and ALL reconstruction. Combined ACL and ALL reconstruction has been hypothesized to result in better clinical and functional outcomes than isolated ACL reconstruction (ACLR). METHODS: One-hundred and seven adult male athletes with ACL tears and high-grade pivot shifts were randomized into two groups. Those in group A (n = 54) underwent ACLR, while those in group B (n = 53) underwent combined ACL and ALL reconstruction. The median age was 26 (18-40) and 24 (18-33) years in groups A and B, respectively, and the median follow-up was 60 (55-65) months. Physical examination findings, instrumented knee laxity tested using a KT-1000 arthrometer, and International Knee Documentation Committee Scale (IKDC) scores were used to evaluate the outcomes. RESULTS: One-hundred and two patients were available for follow-up: 52 in group A and 50 in group B. Postoperatively, the pivot shift was normal in 43 (82.7%) and 48 (96%) patients in groups A and B, respectively (p < 0.001). The median instrumented knee laxity was 2.5 ± 0.7 (1.2-6.1) mm in patients in group A and 1.2 ± 0.7 (1.2-3.2) mm in patients in group B (p < 0.001). Additionally, 44 (84.6%) patients in group A had normal IKDC scores and 3 (5.8%) had nearly normal scores, while 48 (96.0%) patients in group B had normal IKDC scores and 2 (4%) had nearly normal scores (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Combined ACL and ALL reconstruction, compared with isolated ACLR resulted in favourable clinical and functional outcomes, as demonstrated by decreased rotational instability and instrumented knee laxity, a lower graft rupture rate and better postoperative IKDC scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.