Ligament augmentation and reconstruction system (LARS) synthetic grafts are safe and effective for medial collateral ligament and posterolateral corner reconstructions in elite athletes.

PURPOSE: This study documents the efficacy and safety of using a Ligament Augmentation and Reconstruction System (LARS) ligament graft to augment extra-articular knee ligament reconstructions in elite athletes by reporting return-to-play (RTP) rates and levels, career longevity and complications. METHODS: A consecutive series of all extra-articular knee ligament reconstructions augmented by LARS ligaments in elite athletes undertaken by three specialist sports knee surgeons between 2013 and 2020 were reviewed. Seventy-six elite athletes, aged over 16 years old, and more than 2 years postsurgery were included. RTP was defined as competing at professional level or national/international level in amateur sport. RESULTS: There were 64 medial collateral ligament (MCL) and 12 posterolateral corner (PLC) reconstructions. Fifty-two (68.4%) underwent concomitant autograft cruciate ligament(s) reconstruction. The mean age was 25.1 years (SD ± 4.5). Most were football (35, 46.1%) or rugby players (35, 46.1%). Sixty-seven athletes (88.2%) RTP with 65 (97.0%) of these playing at the same or higher Tegner level. Fifty-six (83.6%) of the athletes that RTP were still playing at 2 years postsurgery. Twenty (57.1%) of those who had RTP and were more than 5 years postsurgery were still playing at 5 years. Six (7.9%) players required further surgery relating to the LARS/metalwork. One case had soft tissue inflammation adjacent to the proximal end of the synthetic graft, but it is unknown if this was mechanical irritation or a biological reaction. One MCL reruptured 4 years after RTP. CONCLUSION: Utilising LARS to augment extra-articular knee ligament reconstructions allows 88.2% of athletes with a variety of knee ligament injuries to return to elite sport. The low morbidity rates coupled with 57% of athletes still playing 5 years postsurgery demonstrates that the LARS is safe and effective in these cases. Although there are reports of LARS ligaments being used in MCL and PLC reconstructions, there is very little evidence investigating if they are safe and effective. This study demonstrates that LARS synthetic grafts can be safely used for MCL and PLC reconstructions in elite athletes and they permit a high RTP with a low risk of complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Rates and Levels of Elite Sport Participation at 5 Years After Revision ACL Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data regarding return to play (RTP), level of competition, and longevity of play after revision of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) in elite athletes. PURPOSE: To report RTP rates and competition levels in elite athletes at the point of RTP, as well as at 2 and 5 years after revision ACLR, and the effect of meniscal and chondral pathology at revision surgery on these outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A retrospective review of a consecutive series of all revision ACLRs undertaken by the senior author between 2009 and 2019, with a minimum 2-year follow-up, was carried out. Outcome measures were RTP rates and competition level. RESULTS: A total of 49 knees in 48 elite athletes met the inclusion criteria. After revision ACLR, 43 (87.8%) elite athletes achieved RTP, of whom 75.5% were at the same level. At 2 years after surgery, 39 (79.6%) were still playing, 25 (51%) at the same level; at 5 years after surgery, 20 (44.4%) were still playing, 9 (20%) at the same level. Elite athletes with <50% thickness or no articular cartilage lesions were more likely to RTP (94.6% vs 66.7%; P = .026), as well as return to the same competition level (83.8% vs 50%; P = .047), compared with those with ≥50% thickness chondral lesions. Those without medial meniscal pathology were more likely to RTP at the same level after revision surgery (94.4% vs 64.5%; P = .036). The median time elite athletes continued to play after revision ACLR was 73 months (95% CI, 43.4-102.6); 23 months at the same level (95% CI, 13.6-32.4). The probability of still playing at 5 years after surgery was 55.9%, with a 22.5% chance of maintaining preinjury competition level. CONCLUSION: In elite athletes, RTP rates and competition level decreased over time after revision ACLR. The presence of >50% thickness chondral pathology was associated with lower RTP rates and competition level at RTP time, while medial meniscal pathology was associated with lower competition level at RTP.

A Triple-Strand Anatomic Medial Collateral Ligament Reconstruction Restores Knee Stability More Completely Than a Double-Strand Reconstruction: A Biomechanical Study In Vitro.

BACKGROUND: There are many descriptions of medial collateral ligament (MCL) reconstruction, but they may not reproduce the anatomic structures and there is little evidence of their biomechanical performance. PURPOSE: To investigate the ability of "anatomic" MCL reconstruction to restore native stability after grade III MCL plus posteromedial capsule/posterior oblique ligament injuries in vitro. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Twelve cadaveric knees were mounted in a kinematic testing rig to impose tibial displacing loads while the knee was flexed-extended: 88-N anteroposterior translation, 5-N·m internal-external rotation, 8-N·m valgus-varus, and combined anterior translation plus external rotation (anteromedial rotatory instability). Joint motion was measured via optical trackers with the knee intact; after superficial MCL (sMCL), deep MCL (dMCL), and posterior oblique ligament transection; and then after MCL double- and triple-strand reconstructions. Double strands reproduced the sMCL and posterior oblique ligament and triple-strands the sMCL, dMCL, and posterior oblique ligament. The sMCL was placed 5 mm posterior to the epicondyle in the double-strand technique and at the epicondyle in the triple-strand technique. Kinematic changes were examined by repeated measures 2-way analysis of variance with posttesting. RESULTS: Transection of the sMCL, dMCL, and posterior oblique ligament increased valgus rotation (5° mean) and external rotation (9° mean). The double-strand reconstruction controlled valgus in extension but allowed 5° excess valgus in flexion and did not restore external rotation (7° excess). The triple-strand reconstruction restored both external rotation and valgus throughout flexion. CONCLUSION: In a cadaveric model, a triple-strand reconstruction including a dMCL graft restored native external rotation, while a double-strand reconstruction without a dMCL graft did not. A reconstruction with the sMCL graft placed isometrically on the medial epicondyle restored valgus rotation across the arc of knee flexion, whereas a reconstruction with a more posteriorly placed sMCL graft slackened with knee flexion. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: An MCL injury may rupture the anteromedial capsule and dMCL, causing anteromedial rotatory instability. Persistent MCL instability increases the likelihood of ACL graft failure after combined injury. A reconstruction with an anteromedial dMCL graft restored native external rotation, which may help to unload/protect an ACL graft. It is important to locate the sMCL graft isometrically at the femoral epicondyle to restore valgus across flexion.

Medial Collateral Ligament Reconstruction for Anteromedial Instability of the Knee: A Biomechanical Study In Vitro.

BACKGROUND: Although a medial collateral ligament (MCL) injury is associated with anteromedial rotatory instability (AMRI) and often with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, there has been little work to develop anteromedial (AM) reconstruction to address this laxity. PURPOSE: To measure the ability of a novel "anatomic" AM reconstruction technique to restore native knee laxity for isolated AM insufficiency and combined AM plus posteromedial insufficiency. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: A total of 12 cadaveric knees were mounted in a kinematic testing rig that allowed the tibia to be loaded while the knee flexed-extended 0° to 100° with 88-N anteroposterior translation, 5-N·m internal rotation-external rotation (ER), 8-N·m valgus, and combined anterior translation plus ER to simulate AMRI. Joint motion was measured using optical trackers with the knee intact, after superficial MCL (sMCL) and deep MCL (dMCL) transection, and after AM reconstruction of the sMCL and dMCL with semitendinosus autografts. The posteromedial capsule (PMC)/posterior oblique ligament (POL) was then transected to induce a grade 3 medial injury, and kinematic measurements were repeated afterward and again after removing the grafts. Laxity changes were examined using repeated-measures analysis of variance and post-testing. RESULTS: sMCL and dMCL deficiency increased valgus, ER, and AMRI laxities. These laxities did not differ from native values after AM reconstruction. Additional PMC/POL deficiency did not increase these laxities significantly but did increase internal rotation laxity near knee extension; this was not controlled by AM reconstruction. CONCLUSION: AM reconstruction eliminated AMRI after transection of the dMCL and sMCL, and also eliminated AMRI after additional PMC/POL transection. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Many MCL injuries occur in combination with ACL injuries, causing AMRI. These injuries may rupture the AM capsule and dMCL. Unaddressed MCL deficiency leads to an increased ACL reconstruction failure rate. A dMCL construct oriented anterodistally across the medial joint line, along with an sMCL graft, can restore native knee ER laxity. PMC/POL lesions did not contribute to AMRI.

A review of surgical repair methods and patient outcomes for gluteal tendon tears.

Advanced hip imaging and surgical findings have demonstrated that a common cause of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) is gluteal tendon tears. Conservative measures are initially employed to treat GTPS and manage gluteal tears, though patients frequently undergo multiple courses of non-operative treatment with only temporary pain relief. Therefore, a number of surgical treatment options for recalcitrant GTPS associated with gluteal tears have been reported. These have included open trans-osseous or bone anchored suture techniques, endoscopic methods and the use of tendon augmentation for repair reinforcement. This review describes the anatomy, pathophysiology and clinical presentation of gluteal tendon tears. Surgical techniques and patient reported outcomes are presented. This review demonstrates that surgical repair can result in improved patient outcomes, irrespective of tear aetiology, and suggests that the patient with "trochanteric bursitis" should be carefully assessed as newer surgical techniques show promise for a condition that historically has been managed conservatively.