Technique for Surgical Dissection and Histological Investigation of the Anterolateral Ligament in the Fetal Knee.

There is growing evidence into the structure and function of the anterolateral ligament (ALL) of the knee. However, debate still exists about the anatomical characteristics, biomechanical role, and even the existence of the ALL, despite numerous cadaveric, biomechanical, and clinical studies. This article describes, with video illustration, the surgical dissection of the ALL in human fetal lower limbs, including determination of detailed anatomical and histological features of the ALL during fetal development. The ALL was clearly identified in dissected fetal knees, and histologic analysis shows well-organized, dense collagenous tissue fibers with elongated fibroblasts, consistent with the properties of a ligament.

Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Graft Combined With Modified Lemaire Technique Versus Hamstring Graft Combined With Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction: A Clinical Comparative Matched Study With a Mean Follow-up of 5 Years From The SANTI Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) has recently been correlated with improved clinical outcomes and reduced failure rates in revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR). However, no data are available on clinical outcomes and reoperation after revision ACLR using different LET procedures. PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of ACL + anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction using hamstring tendon graft (HT-ALL) and a bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) graft + modified Lemaire tenodesis procedure (BPTB-Lemaire) in the setting of revision ACLR and to determine whether ALL reconstruction is associated with an increased rate of adverse outcomes when compared with a modified Lemaire tenodesis procedure. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Descriptive data and clinical outcomes were prospectively collected from patients who underwent revision ACLR with LET between 2009 and 2018 with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients with an HT autograft combined with ALL reconstruction (HT-ALL group) were matched in a 1:1 propensity ratio to patients with a BPTB autograft combined with a modified Lemaire LET procedure (BPTB-Lemaire group). The evaluated parameters included complications and reoperations; knee laxity tests; return to sports; and various scores, including the Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity scale, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Return to Sport After Injury scale, Marx activity rating scale, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee evaluation form, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. RESULTS: In total, 36 matched pairs were included in the analysis. The mean follow-up durations for the BPTB-Lemaire and HT-ALL groups were 56 ± 35 and 57 ± 23 months, respectively (P = .91). No significant differences were found in graft rupture rate (HT-ALL, 0%; BPTB-Lemaire, 11.1%; P = .13) or reoperations (HT-ALL, 8.3%; BPTB-Lemaire, 22.2%; P = .23). No specific complications with regard to LET were noted in either group. Additionally, there were no significant differences in knee laxity parameters, return to sports, or clinical scores between the groups at the final follow-up, except for the Tegner activity scale score (HT-ALL, 6.4; BPTB-Lemaire, 7.3; P = .03). HT-ALL was associated with a shorter surgical time (41.4 vs 59.8 minutes; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: HT-ALL was at least equivalent, in terms of clinical outcomes, to the more commonly performed procedure, BPTB-Lemaire. Performing ALL reconstruction in the setting of revision ACLR is therefore safe and effective.

Long-term Graft Rupture Rates After Combined ACL and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction Versus Isolated ACL Reconstruction: A Matched-Pair Analysis From the SANTI Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Clinical studies have demonstrated significant advantages of combined anterior cruciate ligament and anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ACL+ALLR) over isolated ACL reconstruction (ACLR) with respect to reduced graft rupture rates, a lower risk of reoperation for secondary meniscectomy, improved knee stability, and higher rates of return to sports. However, no long-term studies exist. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of isolated ACLR versus ACL+ALLR at long-term follow-up. The hypothesis was that patients who underwent combined procedures would experience significantly lower rates of graft rupture. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary ACL+ALLR between January 2011 and March 2012 were propensity matched in a 1:1 ratio to patients who underwent isolated ACLR during the same period. A combination of face-to-face and telemedicine postoperative follow-up was undertaken. At the end of the study period (March 2020), medical notes and a final telemedicine interview were used to determine whether patients had experienced any complications or reoperations. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, International Knee Documentation Committee score, Lysholm score, and Tegner score were collected for all patients. Graft survivorship was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Logistic regression was performed to account for the potential effect of activity level on graft rupture rates. RESULTS: A total of 86 matched pairs were included in the study. The mean ± SD age was 32.2 ± 8.8 years (range, 22-67 years) in the ACL+ALLR group and 34.7 ± 8.5 years (range, 21-61 years) in the isolated ACLR group. The mean duration of follow-up was 104.33 ± 3.74 months (range, 97-111 months). Patients who underwent combined ACL+ALLR versus isolated ACLR experienced significantly better ACL graft survivorship (96.5% vs 82.6%, respectively; P = .0027), lower overall rates of reoperation (15.3% vs 32.6%; P < .05), and lower rates of revision ACLR (3.5% vs 17.4%; P < .05). Patients undergoing isolated ACLR were at >5-fold greater risk of graft rupture (odds ratio, 5.549; 95% CI, 1.431-21.511; P = .0132), regardless of their preinjury activity level. There were no significant differences between groups with respect to other complications or any clinically important differences in patient-reported outcome measures. CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent combined ACL+ALLR experienced significantly better long-term ACL graft survivorship, lower overall rates of reoperation, and no increase in complications compared with patients who underwent isolated ACLR. Further, patients who underwent isolated ACLR had a >5-fold increased risk of undergoing revision surgery at a mean follow-up of 104.3 months.

Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Alters Lateral Compartment Contact Mechanics under Simulated Pivoting Maneuvers: An In Vitro Study.

BACKGROUND: There is concern that utilization of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) may disturb lateral compartment contact mechanics and contribute to joint degeneration. HYPOTHESIS: ACLR augmented with LET will alter lateral compartment contact mechanics in response to simulated pivoting maneuvers. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Loads simulating a pivot shift were applied to 7 cadaveric knees (4 male; mean age, 39 ± 12 years; range, 28-54 years) using a robotic manipulator. Each knee was tested with the ACL intact, sectioned, reconstructed (via patellar tendon autograft), and, finally, after augmenting ACLR with LET (using a modified Lemaire technique) in the presence of a sectioned anterolateral ligament and Kaplan fibers. Lateral compartment contact mechanics were measured using a contact stress transducer. Outcome measures were anteroposterior location of the center of contact stress (CCS), contact force from anterior to posterior, and peak and mean contact stress. RESULTS: On average, augmenting ACLR with LET shifted the lateral compartment CCS anteriorly compared with the intact knee and compared with ACLR in isolation by a maximum of 5.4 ± 2.3 mm (P < .001) and 6.0 ± 2.6 mm (P < .001), respectively. ACLR augmented with LET also increased contact force anteriorly on the lateral tibial plateau compared with the intact knee and compared with isolated ACLR by a maximum of 12 ± 6 N (P = .001) and 17 ± 10 N (P = .002), respectively. Compared with ACLR in isolation, ACLR augmented with LET increased peak and mean lateral compartment contact stress by 0.7 ± 0.5 MPa (P = .005) and by 0.17 ± 0.12 (P = .006), respectively, at 15° of flexion. CONCLUSION: Under simulated pivoting loads, adding LET to ACLR anteriorized the CCS on the lateral tibial plateau, thereby increasing contact force anteriorly. Compared with ACLR in isolation, ACLR augmented with LET increased peak and mean lateral compartment contact stress at 15° of flexion. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The clinical and biological effect of increased anterior loading of the lateral compartment after LET merits further investigation. The ability of LET to anteriorize contact stress on the lateral compartment may be useful in knees with passive anterior subluxation of the lateral tibia.

Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Reduces Anterior Cruciate Ligament Graft Force and Anterior Tibial Translation in Response to Applied Pivoting and Anterior Drawer Loads.

BACKGROUND: The biomechanical effect of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) performed in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) on load sharing between the ACL graft and the LET and on knee kinematics is not clear. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose was to quantify the effect of LET on (1) forces carried by both the ACL graft and the LET and (2) tibiofemoral kinematics in response to simulated pivot shift and anterior laxity tests. We hypothesized that LET would decrease forces carried by the ACL graft and anterior tibial translation (ATT) in response to simulated pivoting maneuvers and during simulated tests of anterior laxity. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Seven cadaveric knees (mean age, 39 ± 12 years [range, 28-54 years]; 4 male) were mounted to a robotic manipulator. The robot simulated clinical pivoting maneuvers and tests of anterior laxity: namely, the Lachman and anterior drawer tests. Each knee was assessed in the following states: ACL intact, ACL sectioned, ACL reconstructed (using a bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft), and after performing LET (the modified Lemaire technique after sectioning of the anterolateral ligament and Kaplan fibers). Resultant forces carried by the ACL graft and LET at the peak applied loads were determined via superposition. ATT was determined in response to the applied loads. RESULTS: With the applied pivoting loads, performing LET decreased ACL graft force up to 80% (44 ± 12 N; P < .001) and decreased ATT of the lateral compartment compared with that of the intact knee up to 7.6 ± 2.9 mm (P < .001). The LET carried up to 91% of the force generated in the ACL graft during isolated ACLR (without LET). For simulated tests of anterior laxity, performing LET decreased ACL graft force by 70% (40 ± 20 N; P = .001) for the anterior drawer test with no significant difference detected for the Lachman test. No differences in ATT were deteced between ACLR with LET and the intact knee on both the Lachman and the anterior drawer tests (P = .409). LET reduced ATT compared with isolated ACLR on the simulated anterior drawer test by 2.4 ± 1.8 mm (P = .032) but not on the simulated Lachman test. CONCLUSION: In a cadaveric model, LET in combination with ACLR transferred loads from the ACL graft to the LET and reduced ATT with applied pivoting loads and during the simulated anterior drawer test. The effect of LET on ACL graft force and ATT was less pronounced on the simulated Lachman test. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: LET in addition to ACLR may be a suitable option to offload the ACL graft and to reduce ATT in the lateral compartment to magnitudes less than that of the intact knee with clinical pivoting maneuvers. In contrast, LET did not offload the ACL graft or add to the anterior restraint provided by the ACL graft during the Lachman test.

Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair: A Systematic Review from the Scientific Anterior Cruciate Ligament Network International Study Group.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review of contemporary studies reporting clinical outcomes of primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair to determine whether these studies demonstrate any significant benefit of ACL repair and whether there is evidence of a deterioration of mid-term outcomes as seen in historical data. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. A PubMed search using the keywords "repair" AND "Anterior Cruciate Ligament" was performed (limits: English language, publication date between January 1, 2014, and January 13, 2019). All identified studies reporting clinical outcomes of arthroscopic ACL repair were included. Critical appraisal was conducted using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Clinical Trials and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. Basic parameters of each study including population characteristics, repair technique, physical examination findings, and clinical outcome scores were recorded and evaluated. RESULTS: Nineteen eligible studies were identified (including 5 comparative studies). None of the comparative studies showed any significant difference between repair and reconstruction groups with respect to International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm, Tegner, side-to-side laxity difference, Lachman, pivot shift tests, or graft rupture rates. Four non-comparative studies reported outcomes at medium- to long-term follow up (range of mean follow up 43.3-79 months) with a mean Lysholm score between 85.3 and 100, mean IKDC subjective score between 87.3 and 100, and mean Tegner activity score between 5 and 7. CONCLUSIONS: Comparative studies identified no significant differences between ACL repair and reconstruction with respect to Lysholm, IKDC, side-to-side laxity difference, pivot shift grade, or graft rupture rates. However, these studies had major limitations including small numbers and short durations of follow up. Case series demonstrated that excellent outcomes can be achieved at medium- to long-term follow up with the SAR technique. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; Systematic review of Level II to IV investigations.

Clinical Outcomes and Predictive Factors for Failure With Isolated MPFL Reconstruction for Recurrent Patellar Instability: A Series of 211 Reconstructions With a Minimum Follow-up of 3 Years.

BACKGROUND: Reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) is widely acknowledged as an integral part of the current therapeutic armamentarium for recurrent patellar instability. The procedure is often performed with concomitant bony procedures, such as distalization of the tibial tuberosity or trochleoplasty in the case of patella alta or high-grade trochlear dysplasia, respectively. At the present time, few studies have evaluated the clinical effectiveness of MPFL reconstruction as an isolated intervention. PURPOSE: To report the clinical outcomes of isolated MPFL reconstruction in cases of patellar instability and to identify predictive factors for failure. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed, including all patients who had undergone isolated MPFL reconstruction between January 2008 and January 2014. Preoperative assessment included the Kujala score, assessment of patellar tracking ("J-sign"), and radiographic features, such as trochlear dysplasia according to Dejour classification, patellar height with the Caton-Deschamps index (CDI), tibial tubercle-trochlear groove distance, and patellar tilt. The Kujala score was assessed postoperatively. Failure was defined by a postoperative patellar dislocation or surgical revision for recurrent patellar instability. RESULTS: A total of 239 MPFL reconstructions were included; 28 patients (11.7%) were uncontactable and considered lost to follow-up. Thus, 211 reconstructions were analyzed with a mean follow-up of 5.8 years (range, 3-9.3 years). The mean age at surgery was 20.6 years (range, 12-48 years), and 55% of patients were male. Twenty-seven percent of patients had a preoperative positive J-sign, and 93% of patients had trochlear dysplasia (A, 47%; B, 25%; C, 15%; D, 6%). The mean CDI was 1.2 (range, 1.0-1.7); mean tibial tubercle-trochlear groove distance, 15 mm (range, 5-30 mm); and mean patellar tilt, 23° (range, 9°-47°). The mean Kujala score improved from 56.1 preoperatively to 88.8 ( P < .001). Ten failures were reported that required surgical revision for recurrent patellar instability (4.7%). Uni- and multivariate analyses highlighted 2 preoperative risk factors for failure: patella alta (CDI ≥1.3; odds ratio, 4.9; P = .02) and preoperative positive J-sign (odds ratio, 3.9; P = .04). CONCLUSION: In cases of recurrent patellar instability, isolated MPFL reconstruction would appear to be a safe and efficient surgical procedure with a low failure rate. Preoperative failure risk factors identified in this study were patella alta with a CDI ≥1.3 and a preoperative positive J-sign.

Mid-term outcomes of titanium modular neck femoral stems in revision total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Modular stems have been widely studied as they allow intraoperative adjustments (offset, anteversion, limb length) to better restore hip biomechanics. Many authors reported outcomes of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) using modular stems with metaphyseal-diaphyseal junctions, however, little is known about modular neck femoral stems (MNFS) with metaphyseal-epiphyseal junctions. We therefore aimed to report outcomes and implant survival of a MNFS in a consecutive series of revision THA at a minimum follow-up of 5 years. METHODS: We reviewed a consecutive series of 28 revision THAs performed between February 2010 and March 2012 using an uncemented MNFS. The final study cohort included 25 patients living with their original components, at a mean follow-up of 68.4±7.4 months and aged 67.7±11.6 years at index operation. RESULTS: The Harris Hip Score (HHS) improved from 39.1±19.2 pre-operatively to 78.1±18.3 post-operatively, and the Postel Merle d'Aubigné score (PMA) improved from 9.8±3.0 pre-operatively to 14.8±2.8 post-operatively. The postoperative limb length discrepancy (LLD) was >10 mm in 18% of the hips. There were no significant differences of femoral offset and neck shaft angle (NSA) between operated and contralateral hips. Two hips (8.0%) showed new periprosthetic radiolucent lines. Periprosthetic fractures (PPF) occurred in 3 hips (12%). No subluxations, dislocations or implant breakages were reported. One revision (3.6%) was performed with retrieval of the revision stem for infection. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival at 5 years, using stem revision as endpoint, was 96.0%. CONCLUSIONS: The Optimal® MNFS provided a satisfactory survival and clinical outcomes at 5 years, with no noticeable adverse effects resulting from the additional modular junction.

Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction.

There has been a renewed interest in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repairs over the last decade with some early promising results in the right patient population. Additionally, the anterolateral ligament has been extensively studied and has recently been shown to have a protective effect on standard ACL reconstructions in a clinical trial. Given its protective effect on ACL reconstructions, we believe this phenomenon is also relevant to ACL repairs and can decrease rerupture rates. In this publication, we demonstrate a surgical technique for ACL repair using an internal brace combined with an anterolateral ligament reconstruction using a gracilis autograft.

Anterolateral Ligament of the Knee: Diagnosis, Indications, Technique, Outcomes.

In the context of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery, anterolateral ligament reconstruction is now recognized as a reliable option to control rotatory instability and should be considered in the knee surgeon's modern armamentarium. By highlighting its daily practical application, this infographic presents the indications for this specific additional lateral augmentation, the anatomic and biomechanical principles that underline its rationale, and the clinical outcomes from recent large series. In 2013, Claes et al. updated the anterolateral ligament (ALL) concept, and numerous subsequent studies detailed its precise anatomy. It is now accepted that the femoral insertion is located proximal and posterior to the epicondyle. The biomechanical behavior of the ALL during the knee flexion path has been reported to provide control of tibial internal rotation during the pivot shift and with increasing knee flexion angles (>35). Clinically, when a patient presents with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, clinical examination (pivot shift test), radiography (Segond fracture), ultrasound, and 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging are useful to assess a combined ALL injury. The following indications for ALL reconstruction are now well established: ACL revision, high-grade pivot shift test, chronic ACL rupture, young patients, pivoting activities, and patients undergoing medial meniscus repair. It has been reported that anatomic and minimally invasive surgical techniques that control anterolateral rotatory instability can achieve successful outcomes without specific complications. Finally, the addition of ALL reconstruction does not delay postoperative rehabilitation, and no modification is required for an early rehabilitation protocol.

Combined Anterior Cruciate and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction in the Professional Athlete: Clinical Outcomes From the Scientific Anterior Cruciate Ligament Network International Study Group in a Series of 70 Patients With a Minimum Follow-Up of 2 Years.

PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical outcomes in professional athletes after combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction at a minimum follow-up of 2 years. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Scientific Anterior Cruciate Ligament Network International (SANTI) Study Group database was performed. All professional athletes who underwent primary combined ACL and ALL reconstruction between January 2011 and March 2016 were included. Patient assessment included physical examination, pre- and postoperative subjective and objective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner activity scale, and Lysholm scores. RESULTS: Seventy-two professional athletes underwent primary ACL and ALL reconstruction; 70 (97%) were available, with a mean follow-up of 3.9 years (range, 2-7). The preoperative side-to-side anteroposterior laxity difference was 7.1 ± 1.4 mm, and this decreased significantly after surgery to 0.4 ± 0.9 mm (P < .0001). Pivot-shift grade evolved from 16 grade I (22.8%) and 54 grade II or III (77.2%) preoperatively, to 66 absent pivot shift (94.3%) and 4 grade I (5.7; P < .001). By 1-year postoperatively, 60 athletes (85.7%) returned to professional sport, with a mean time interval of 7.9 months (range, 5-12). Preoperatively, the mean subjective IKDC was 56.1 ± 12.3, the Lysholm score was 48.4 ± 12.5, and the Tegner score was 9.3 ± 1. At final follow-up, the mean subjective IKDC was 90.5 ± 7.6 (P < .0001), the Lysholm score was 94.4 ± 7.5 (P < .0001), and the Tegner score was 8.8 ± 1.5 (P < .004). The objective IKDC evolved from 39 grade C (55.7%) and 31 grade D (44.3%) preoperatively to 65 grade A (92.9%) and 5 grade B (7.1%) (P < .0001). Eleven Patients (15,7%) underwent a subsequent ipsilateral reoperation including 4 (5.7%) revision ACL reconstructions. The risk of graft rupture was significantly higher in female patients (13.6% vs 2.1% in male patients; P = .048). CONCLUSIONS: Combined ACL and ALL reconstruction is associated with excellent outcomes in professional athletes with respect to graft rupture rates, return to sport, knee stability, and reoperation rates after injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

Arthrogenic muscle inhibition after ACL reconstruction: a scoping review of the efficacy of interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether reported therapeutic interventions for arthrogenic muscle inhibition (AMI) in patients with ACL injuries, following ACL reconstruction, or in laboratory studies of AMI, are effective in improving quadriceps activation failure when compared with standard therapy in control groups. DESIGN: A scoping review of the efficacy of interventions was conducted in accordance with the methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Search terms included 'arthrogenic muscle inhibition', 'quadriceps activation following knee injuries', 'anterior cruciate' or 'knee' combined with 'quadriceps activation', 'quadriceps inhibition', 'corticomotor', 'arthrogenic', 'brain activation' and 'neuroplasticity'. Articles were evaluated for risk of bias using the PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database) criteria. The overall quality of evidence for each intervention was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Isolated case reports and articles reporting outcomes in patients with chronic disease or major trauma were excluded. All other original research articles were included. RESULTS: 780 potential articles were identified. 20 met the inclusion criteria. These studies provided a moderate quality of evidence to support the efficacy of cryotherapy and physical exercises in the management of AMI. There was low-quality evidence for efficacy of neuromuscular electrical stimulation and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and very low-quality evidence for efficacy of ultrasound and vibration. CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review demonstrated moderate-quality evidence for the efficacy of cryotherapy and physical exercises in improving quadriceps activation failure after ACL injury and reconstruction. These therapeutic modalities are therefore recommended in the management of AMI.

Epidemiological Evaluation of Meniscal Ramp Lesions in 3214 Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Injured Knees From the SANTI Study Group Database: A Risk Factor Analysis and Study of Secondary Meniscectomy Rates Following 769 Ramp Repairs.

BACKGROUND: Ramp lesions are characterized by disruption of the peripheral meniscocapsular attachments of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus. Ramp repair performed at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has been shown to improve knee biomechanics. PURPOSE: The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the incidence of and risk factors for ramp lesions among a large series of patients undergoing ACLR. Secondary objectives were to determine the reoperation rate for failure of ramp repair, defined by subsequent reoperations for partial medial meniscectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: All patients underwent transnotch posteromedial compartment evaluation of the knee during ACLR. Ramp repair was performed if a lesion was detected. Potentially important risk factors were analyzed for their association with ramp lesions. A secondary analysis of all patients who underwent ramp repair and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years was undertaken to determine the secondary partial meniscectomy rate for failed ramp repair. RESULTS: The overall incidence of ramp lesions in the study population was 23.9% (769 ramp lesions among 3214 patients). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that the presence of ramp lesions was significantly associated with the following risk factors: male sex, patients aged <30 years, revision ACLR, chronic injuries, preoperative side-to-side laxity >6 mm, and concomitant lateral meniscal tears. The secondary meniscectomy rate was 10.8% at a mean follow-up of 45.6 months (range, 24.2-66.2 months). Patients who underwent ACLR + anterolateral ligament reconstruction had a >2-fold reduction in the risk of reoperation for failure of ramp repair as compared with patients who underwent isolated ACLR (hazard ratio, 0.457; 95% CI, 0.226-0.864; P = .021). CONCLUSION: There is a high incidence of ramp lesions among patients undergoing ACLR. The identification of important risk factors for ramp lesions should help raise an appropriate index of suspicion and prompt posteromedial compartment evaluation. The overall secondary partial meniscectomy rate after ramp repair is 10.8%. Anterolateral ligament reconstruction appears to confer a protective effect on the ramp repair performed at the time of ACLR and results in a significant reduction in secondary meniscectomy rates.

Combined ACL and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Clinical results of combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction have demonstrated a significant reduction in ACL graft rupture rates and improved rates of return to sports compared with isolated ACL reconstruction1. This finding is supported by laboratory studies that have demonstrated that combined ACL reconstruction and lateral extra-articular tenodesis procedures protect the ACL graft by load-sharing with it and by more reliably restoring normal knee kinematics compared with isolated ACL reconstruction. DESCRIPTION: The ACL graft is formed from a tripled semitendinosus tendon and a single strand of gracilis tendon. The femoral tunnel is drilled to provide an anatomic location intra-articularly and to exit the femur just posterior and proximal to the lateral epicondyle. The additional length of gracilis therefore exits the femoral tunnel at the anatomic origin of the ALL and is then routed (under the iliotibial band [ITB]) through a tibial tunnel, and back to the femoral origin, to reconstruct the ALL. ALTERNATIVES: Many different types of nonanatomic lateral extra-articular tenodesis procedures have been reported. The most frequently performed were the Lemaire and MacIntosh procedures; however, these, and others, were widely abandoned after poor results were reported in the 1980s. RATIONALE: ALL reconstruction differs from other lateral extra-articular tenodesis-type procedures because the procedure is anatomically based and can be percutaneously performed. Nonanatomic procedures (typically with a strand of ITB passed under the lateral collateral ligament [LCL]) have been reported to be associated with overconstraint, early arthritis, and an increased risk of infection2-5. In contrast, ALL reconstruction has been shown to restore normal knee kinematics and to avoid overconstraint when correctly fixed in full extension and neutral rotation6. The main concern with any type of lateral extra-articular tenodesis is based on historical reports of poor outcomes2,3. However, a recent study has demonstrated that combined ACL and ALL reconstruction is associated with a reoperation rate that is comparable with the rate seen after isolated ACL reconstruction, and it has a very low rate of complications7. This makes a compelling argument for anatomic ALL and ACL reconstruction being the procedure of choice when considering an extra-articular procedure. This is further supported by the fact that, even though previous studies have demonstrated a trend toward reduced ACL graft rupture with nonanatomic lateral extra-articular tenodesis procedures, they have not shown a significant improvement in outcomes8. Combined ACL and ALL reconstruction is currently the only type of lateral extra-articular procedure that has been demonstrated to significantly reduce the risk of ACL graft rupture and improve the rate of return to sports1.

Validation of a Composite Test for Assessment of Readiness for Return to Sports After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: The K-STARTS Test.

BACKGROUND:: There is limited information on the appropriate timing of return to sports after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. A composite test was developed to assess the athlete's ability to return to sports after ACL reconstruction: the Knee Santy Athletic Return To Sport (K-STARTS) test. HYPOTHESIS:: The K-STARTS test meets validation criteria for an outcome score assessing readiness for return to sports after ACL reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN:: Diagnostic study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:: Level 3. METHODS:: A prospective comparative study identified 410 participants: 371 participants who had undergone ACL reconstruction and a control group of 39 healthy participants. The K-STARTS score is calculated as the sum of 7 tests (8 components), for a maximal value of 21 points. Construct validity, internal consistency, discriminant validity, and sensitivity to change were used to validate this new test. RESULTS:: The K-STARTS assessment showed a high completion rate (100%), high reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.87; coefficient of variation, 7.8%), and high sensitivity to change. There was moderate correlation with the ACL Return to Sports after Injury scale (ACL-RSI) and hop tests. There were no ceiling or floor effects. There was a significant difference between K-STARTS scores assessed at 6 and 8 months postoperatively (11.2 ± 2.7 vs 17.1 ± 3.2; P < 0.001). The K-STARTS score in the control group was significantly higher than that in the ACL reconstruction group (17.3 ± 2.1 and 13.7 ± 3.8, respectively; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION:: The K-STARTS test is an objective outcome measure for functional improvement after ACL reconstruction. CLINICAL RELEVANCE:: It is important for the clinician to determine when return to sports is optimal after ACL reconstruction to reduce the current high risk of reinjury.

How to Rapidly Abolish Knee Extension Deficit After Injury or Surgery: A Practice-Changing Video Pearl From the Scientific Anterior Cruciate Ligament Network International (SANTI) Study Group.

Knee extension deficit is frequently observed after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction or rupture and other acute knee injuries. Loss of terminal extension often occurs because of hamstring contracture and quadriceps inactivation rather than mechanical intra-articular pathology. Failure to regain full extension in the first few weeks after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is a recognized risk factor for adverse long-term outcomes, and therefore, it is important to try to address it. In this Technical Note, a simple, rapid, and effective technique to help regain full knee extension and abolish quadriceps activation failure is described.