Tibial-sided Anterolateral Ligament Injuries Are Associated With Poor Healing and Residual Pivot Shift Testing After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To investigate whether tibial-sided anterolateral ligament (ALL) injuries are associated with poor healing and residual pivot shift. METHODS: Patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions within postinjury 6 weeks from January 2008 to March 2021 were included. They had concomitant ALL injury confirmed by preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and were followed for a minimum of 20 months. Preoperative ALL injury was graded by the Muramatsu classification, and postoperative ALL healing were graded by a modification of the Lee classification (good, partial, and nonvisualized). The patients were allocated to an improved group (IG) and an unimproved group (UG) on the basis of a comparison of pre- and postoperative MRI. ALL tear site, postoperative knee stability, Lysholm score, and Tegner activity scale (patient-reported outcomes [PROs]) were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: In total, 128 patients were enrolled; 94.5% patients achieved the minimal clinically important difference for PROs, respectively. The ALL was torn at the femoral side in 46.9% patients, at midsubstance in 31.2.%, and at tibial side in 21.9%, Preoperatively, 86 (67.2%) patients had a partial tear, and 42 (32.8%) patients had a complete tear. On the basis of the postoperative MRI appearances, 38 (29.7%) and 90 (70.3%) patients were allocated to the IG and UG, respectively. The tibial-side tears were significantly frequent in the UG (P = .032). Pivot shift showed a significantly greater incidence in the UG than IG (P = .004). Lachman test and PROs did not differ between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Tibial-sided ALL tears occurred in 18.7% of the UG compared with 3.2% of the IG, and 45.6% of the UG had a postoperative grade 1 or 2 pivot shift compared with 15.8% of the IG. Percentages of patients with the minimal clinically important difference for PROs did not differ between the 2 groups. However, the clinical relevance is limited by a high transfer bias. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level III, retrospective cohort study.