Increased complications rates and inferior patient reported outcomes following total knee arthroplasty due to post-traumatic osteoarthritis with previous fracture treatment: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: This study aims to present the existing literature relating to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complications in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) due to posttraumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) with prior fracture treatment around the knee compared with patients who underwent TKA because of primary osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken and synthesised in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines by searching existing literature in the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and EMBASE. A search string according to the PECO was used. After analysing 2781 studies, 18 studies (5729 PTOA patients/149,843 OA patients) were included for a final review. An analysis revealed that 12 (67%) were retrospective cohort studies, four (22%) were register studies and the remaining two (11%) were prospective cohort studies. The mean Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) score was 23.6 out of 28, signifying studies of moderate quality. RESULTS: The most frequently reported outcome measure were postoperative complications, reported in all eighteen studies. Intraoperative complications were reported in ten (4165 PTOA/124.511 OA) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in six studies (210 PTOA/2768 OA). A total of nine different PROMs were evaluated. As far as PROMs were concerned, the scores were inferior for PTOA but did not differ statistically from OA, except for one study, which favoured the OA group. Across all studies, postoperative complications were higher in the PTOA group, reporting infections as the most common complication. Furthermore, a higher revision rate was reported in the PTOA group. CONCLUSION: PROM analysis suggests that both patient groups benefit from a TKA in terms of functional outcome and pain relief, however, patient-reported outcomes could be inferior for PTOA patients. There is consistent evidence for increased complication rates following PTOA TKA. Patients undergoing TKA due to PTOA after fracture treatment should be informed about the risk for inferior results and refrain from comparing their knee function to patients with TKA after OA. Surgeons should be aware of the challenges that PTOA TKA poses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Is Not Superior to Anatomic Single-Bundle Reconstruction at 10-Year Follow-up: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The anatomic double-bundle (DB) technique is purported to be a superior technique due to its mimicking of the double-stranded anatomic formation of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). Previous studies with 2-, 5- and 10-year follow-up are conflicted as to whether this technique is superior to the previous gold standard method of ACL reconstruction, the anatomic single-bundle (SB) reconstruction. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare the outcomes of the anatomic DB technique and anatomic SB technique with independent drilling at 10 years after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. We hypothesized that DB ACL reconstruction would result in a better outcome in terms of the pivot-shift test. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 105 patients (33 women, 72 men; median age, 27 years [range, 18-52 years]) were randomized and underwent ACL reconstruction (DB group: n = 53; SB group: n = 52). All reconstruction procedures were performed anatomically by identifying the ACL footprint, using the anteromedial portal for femoral tunnel drilling, and utilizing interference screws for tibial and femoral fixation. One blinded observer examined the patients both preoperatively and at follow-up (median, 120 months [range, 112-134 months]). Multiple subjective and objective clinical evaluations were used to assess the outcomes. Radiographic assessments of osteoarthritis were performed using the Ahlbäck, Kellgren-Lawrence, and Fairbank classification systems early postoperatively and at the final follow-up. RESULTS: Preoperatively, no differences were found between the study groups. Overall, 70 patients (67%; DB group: n = 39; SB group: n = 31) were available for analysis at 10-year follow-up. No significant difference could be shown between the groups in terms of the pivot-shift grade, knee laxity measurements using the KT-1000 arthrometer, manual Lachman grade, single-leg hop test result, range of motion measurements, Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity score, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) score. Correspondingly, no differences were found between the groups regarding the presence of radiographic osteoarthritis at follow-up. Both groups improved at follow-up compared with preoperatively in terms of the pivot-shift grade, knee laxity measurements using the KT-1000 arthrometer, manual Lachman grade, Lysholm knee score, and KOOS score (P < .05 [highest P value for any comparison]). CONCLUSION: The anatomic DB technique was not superior to the anatomic SB technique with independent drilling at 10-year follow-up in regard to objective and subjective measurements. As such, one could argue that there is no need for the continued use of the anatomic DB technique in an unselected population.

The Long-Term Outcome After Early and Late Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

PURPOSE: To compare long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients undergoing either early (group A) or late (group B) surgery after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. METHODS: ACL reconstruction using hamstring tendon autografts was performed in 30 patients in group A (median age, 23 years; range, 17-49 years) and 31 patients in group B (median age, 27 years; range, 17-38 years). The patients in group A were operated on within 5 months (median, 3 months; range, 2-5 months) of injury, whereas those in group B were operated on more than 24 months (median, 30 months; range, 24-48 months) after injury. The follow-up period was 10 years (median, 117 months [range, 77-222 months] in group A and 129 months [range, 77-206 months] in group B; P = .44). Multiple objective clinical evaluation tests and patient-reported outcome measures were obtained preoperatively and at follow-up. At follow-up, radiographic assessments of knee osteoarthritis (OA) bilaterally were performed. RESULTS: The frequency of meniscectomy at the index operation was significantly lower in group A (20%) than in group B (52%) (P = .01). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of Tegner and Lysholm scores and laxity tests both preoperatively and at follow-up. Both groups improved over time in terms of Tegner and Lysholm scores (P < .05). At follow-up, significantly more medial-compartment OA in the index knee was found in group B than in group A (P = .037) according to the Ahlbäck classification system. The index knee showed significantly more OA than the contralateral knee in both groups (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent early ACL reconstruction required significantly fewer meniscectomies at the index operation than patients who underwent late reconstruction and showed significantly less OA on the medial side of the knee 10 years after reconstruction. However, no significant differences were found between the groups in terms of clinical assessments. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Radiographic Tibial Tunnel Assessment After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Hamstring Tendon Autografts and Biocomposite Screws: A Prospective Study With 5-Year Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To radiographically assess the tibial tunnel up to 5 years after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using hamstring tendon autografts and biocomposite interference screws. METHODS: Fifty-one patients underwent anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction with metal interference screws in the femur and biocomposite interference screws in the tibia. Standardized digital radiographs with weight-bearing anteroposterior and lateral views of the index knee were taken in the early postoperative period and at 2 and 5 years postoperatively. Of 51 patients, 40 (78%) underwent radiographic assessment on all 3 occasions. Subjective and objective clinical assessments were obtained preoperatively and at the 5-year follow-up. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 65 months (±3.9 months), with a minimum of 59 months. The width of the tibial tunnel on the anteroposterior view was 9.4 mm (±1.4 mm) in the early postoperative period and 9.2 mm (±1.5 mm) at 5 years (P = .64). The corresponding widths on the lateral view were 9.6 mm (±1.5 mm) in the early postoperative period and 9.0 mm (±1.4 mm) at 5 years (P = .014). In 33 of 40 patients (83%) the width of the tibial tunnel had decreased on 1 or both views at 5 years compared with the early postoperative period. The study group had improved significantly at the 5-year follow-up compared with the preoperative assessments in terms of the KT-1000 arthrometer laxity tests (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA), pivot-shift test, Tegner activity scale, and Lysholm knee score (P < .001). No correlations were found between the tunnel widths and the KT-1000 assessment. CONCLUSIONS: In 83% of patients, the width of the tibial tunnel had decreased on 1 or both radiographic views at 5 years compared with the early postoperative period after ACL reconstruction using biocomposite interference screws. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective study.

Comparison of outcome after anatomic double-bundle and antero-medial portal non-anatomic single-bundle reconstruction in ACL-injured patients.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with non-anatomic single-bundle reconstruction. METHODS: In a prospective consecutive series, 94 unselected patients [45 anatomic double-bundle (ADB) and 49 non-anatomic single-bundle (SB)] underwent ACL reconstruction involving hamstring tendon autograft, interference screw fixation on both the femoral and tibial side and drilling the femoral tunnel(s) through the antero-medial portal in both groups. In the ADB group, the remnants of the ACL were identified and the grafts were placed anatomically. In the SB group, traditional placement of the graft was performed in a less anatomic manner. Pre-operatively, the groups were comparable in terms of age, gender, time between injury and operation and associated injuries. One independent physiotherapist performed all the pre-operative and post-operative assessments. RESULTS: The follow-up period was 26 (22-34) and 24 (23-30) months in the ADB and SB groups, respectively (p = 0.005). At follow-up, 78 % in the ADB group and 74 % in the SB group had a negative pivot-shift test (n.s.). The KT-1000 134N measurements were 2 (-5 to 10.5) and 2 (-4 to 7) mm in the ADB and SB groups, respectively (n.s.). At follow-up, the extension deficit was significantly larger in the ADB group than in the SB group (p = 0.001). The Tegner activity scale was significantly higher in the ADB group both pre-operatively and at follow-up (p = 0.03 and p = 0.004). In overall terms, both groups had improved significantly at the two-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: In an unselected group of ACL-injured patients, anatomic double-bundle reconstruction did not result in better rotational or antero-posterior stability measurements than antero-medial portal non-anatomic single-bundle reconstruction at the two-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Comparison of Anatomic Double- and Single-Bundle Techniques for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Hamstring Tendon Autografts: A Prospective Randomized Study With 5-Year Clinical and Radiographic Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare the outcomes of the anatomic double-bundle (DB) and anatomic single-bundle (SB) techniques 5 years after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Since more effective restoration of rotational laxity is considered the main advantage of the DB technique, the pivot-shift test was the primary outcome variable of the study. HYPOTHESIS: Double-bundle ACL reconstruction will result in a better outcome in terms of the pivot-shift test. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 105 patients (33 women, 72 men; median age, 27 years; range, 18-52 years) were randomized and underwent ACL reconstruction (DB group, n = 53; SB group, n = 52). All reconstructions were performed anatomically by identifying the ACL footprints, using the anteromedial portal for the femoral tunnel drilling, and utilizing interference screw for tibial and femoral fixation. A single blinded observer examined the patients preoperatively and at follow-up (median, 64 months; range, 55-75 months). Multiple subjective and objective clinical evaluation tests and radiographic assessments of osteoarthritis (OA) were performed using the Ahlbäck, Kellgren-Lawrence, and Fairbank grading systems at 6 weeks postoperatively and at the final follow-up evaluation. RESULTS: Preoperatively, no differences were found between the study groups, apart from the preinjury Tegner activity level, which was lower in the DB group (SB: mean, 7.8 [range, 3-9]; DB: mean, 7.3 [range, 0-9]; P = .02). Eighty-seven patients (83%) were available for examination at the 5-year follow-up. Statistical differences could not be found between the groups in terms of the pivot-shift test, KT-1000 arthrometer laxity measurements, manual Lachman test, single-legged-hop test, square-hop test, range of motion, Lysholm knee scoring scale, Tegner activity scale, or Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Correspondingly, no differences were found between the groups regarding the presence of OA at follow-up. However, a significant increase of OA was found within the DB group at the 5-year follow-up. Both groups improved at follow-up compared with the preoperative assessment in terms of the laxity tests, hop tests, and scoring scales. CONCLUSION: At the 5-year follow-up of an unselected group of patients, anatomic DB reconstruction was not superior to anatomic SB reconstruction in terms of the pivot-shift test.