Lower anxiety level to perform movements after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with lateral extra-articular tenodesis compared to without lateral extra-articular tenodesis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the anxiety level to perform movements in patients after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) combined with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) compared to patients after revision ACLR without LET. METHODS: Ninety patients who underwent revision ACLR with ipsilateral bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft and with a minimum of 12 months follow-up were included in this study. Patients were divided into two groups: patients who received revision ACLR in combination with LET (revision ACLR_LET group; mean follow-up: 29.4 months, range: 12-80 months), and patients who received revision ACLR without LET (revision ACLR group; mean follow-up: 61.1 months, range: 22-192 months). All patients filled in a questionnaire about anxiety level related to physical activity and sports, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective form (IKDCsubjective), and the Tegner Activity Score. RESULTS: Patients in the revision ACLR_LET group had a significantly lower anxiety level to perform movements than patients in the revision ACLR group (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found in KOOS, IKDCsubjective, and Tegner Activity Scores. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received LET in addition to revision ACLR have a lower anxiety level to perform movements than patients with revision ACLR alone, despite non-different subjective functional outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study, Level of evidence: III.

Passive anterior tibia translation in anterior cruciate ligament-injured, anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed and healthy knees: a systematic review.

Anterior tibia translation (ATT) is mainly prevented by the anterior cruciate ligament. Passive ATT tests are commonly used to diagnose an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, to select patients for an ACL reconstruction (ACLR), and as an outcome measure after an ACLR. The aim of this review was to present an overview of possible factors determining ATT. A second purpose was to give a summary of the ATT measured in the literature in healthy, ACL-injured and ACLR knees and a comparison between those groups. A literature search was conducted with PubMed. Inclusion criteria were full-text primary studies published in English between January 2006 and October 2016. Studies included reported ATT in explicit data in healthy as well as ACL-injured or ACLR knees or in ACL-injured as well as ACLR knees. Sixty-one articles met inclusion criteria. Two articles measured the ATT in healthy as well as ACL-injured knees, 51 in ACL-injured as well as in ACLR knees, three in ACLR as well as in healthy knees and three in healthy, ACL-injured and ACLR knees. A difference in ATT is found between healthy, contralateral, ACLR and ACL-injured knees and between chronic and acute ACL injury. Graft choices and intra-articular injuries are factors which could affect the ATT. The mean ATT was lowest to highest in ACLR knees using a bone-patella tendon-bone autograft, ACLR knees using a hamstring autograft, contralateral healthy knees, healthy knees, ACLR knees with an allograft and ACL-injured knees. Factors which could affect the ATT are graft choice, ACL injury or reconstruction, intra-articular injuries and whether an ACL injury is chronic or acute. Comparison of ATT between studies should be taken with caution as a high number of different measurement methods are used. To be able to compare studies, more consistency in measuring devices used should be introduced to measuring ATT. The clinical relevance is that an autograft ACLR might give better results than an allograft ACLR as knee laxity is greater when using an allograft tendon. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.