Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2021; 88(5):362-368 | DOI: 10.55095/achot2021/053

Comparison of the Outcomes of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Cadaverous BTB Graft with the Outcomes of Primary ACL Reconstruction with Filtering out the Effects of Age and SexOriginal papers

J. HEGER, M. ROUCHAL*, P. VALIŠ, J. SKLENSKÝ, J. NOVÁK, M. MARŠÁLEK
Ortopedická klinika Lékařské fakulty Masarykovy univerzity Brno a Fakultní nemocnice Brno

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY:
Evaluation of the success rate of revision ACL reconstruction using the cadaverous BTB allogeneic graft and comparison of the outcomes achieved with the data of patients after the primary ACL reconstruction using the autologous BTB graft with filtering out the potential effect of diversity of the groups of patients as concerns sex and age.

MATERIAL AND METHODS:
The evaluated outcomes of 34 patients operated in the period 2004-2017, i.e. with the minimum follow-up period of three years, were compared with the outcomes of 34 patients selected individually so that in pairs the age and sex are identical - 10 women and 24 men in the range of age from 20 to 44 years, with the median of 29 years at the time of surgery. The assessment and comparison of the outcomes achieved are done according to the Lysholm and Tegner scores.

RESULTS:
The mean Lysholm score of the patients after the revision ACL reconstruction using the cadaverous BTB allograft achieved 54.7 points preoperatively, 72.3 points at the 1-year follow-up and 77.4 points at the 3-year follow-up. The Tegner score at the time of full performance before the injury was 7.7 points, whereas it was 5.8 points after the injury and 6.5 points three years after the surgery. In the group of patients after the primary ACL reconstruction using the autologous BTB graft, the Lysholm score was 64.4 points preoperatively, 85.1 points one year postoperatively and 88.2 points three years postoperatively. The results according to the Tegner score achieved by the primary control group at respective follow-up periods were 6.7 points, 5.1 points and 6.2 points respectively.

DISCUSSION:
The increase in the number of performed ACL reconstructions leads also to an increase in the number of revision surgeries. This trend is also fuelled by the change in the lifestyle, the shift in age-related indication criteria for surgery, and other factors. The realistic expectations regarding the outcome of the revision ACL reconstruction shall take into account the effect of multiple insults that the knee must withstand. Even though subjective improvement of the knee condition is usually experienced postoperatively, the achieved outcomes tend to be less positive than in primary reconstructions. The return to the original pre-injury level of sports activities is achieved less frequently after revision surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS:
The revision surgery of ACL rupture using the cadaverous BTB graft is a safe and reliable technique. It has a potential to improve the subjective satisfaction of the patient, nonetheless the mean postoperative Lysholm score is not so high as that achieved in patients after primary ACL reconstruction.

Keywords: anterior cruciate ligament, revision ACL reconstruction, cadaverous BTB graft, ACL graft rerupture

Published: October 15, 2021  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
HEGER J, ROUCHAL M, VALIŠ P, SKLENSKÝ J, NOVÁK J, MARŠÁLEK M. Comparison of the Outcomes of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Cadaverous BTB Graft with the Outcomes of Primary ACL Reconstruction with Filtering out the Effects of Age and Sex. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2021;88(5):362-368. doi: 10.55095/achot2021/053. PubMed PMID: 34738895.
Download citation

References

  1. Brown CA, McAdams TR, Harris AHS, Maffulli N, Safran MR. ACL reconstruction in patients aged 40 years and older: a systematic review and introduction of a new methodology score for ACL studies. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41:2181-2190. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  2. Brückner H. Eine neue Methode der Kreuzbandplastik. Chirurg. 1966;37:413-414. Go to PubMed...
  3. Buller LT, Best MJ, Baraga MG, Kaplan LD. Trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the United States. Orthop J Sports Med. 2014;3:2325967114563664. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  4. Condello V, Zdanowicz U, Di Matteo B, Spalding T, Gelber PE, Adravanti P, Heuberer P, Dimmen S, Sonnery-Cottet B, Hulet C, Bonomo M, Kon E. Allograft tendons are a safe and effective option for revision ACL reconstruction: a clinical review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019;27:1771-1781. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  5. Ferrari JD, Bach BR, Bush-Joseph CA, Wang T, Bojchuk J. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in men and women: an outcome analysis comparing gender. Arthroscopy. 2001;17:588-596. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  6. Fox JA, Pierce M, Bojchuk J, Hayden J, Bush-Joseph CA, Bach BR. Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with nonirradiated fresh-frozen patellar tendon allograft. Arthroscopy. 2004;20:787-794. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  7. George MS, Dunn WR, Spindler KP. Current concepts review: revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34:2026-2037. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  8. Glogovac G, Schumaier AP, Grawe BM. Return to sport following revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in athletes: a systematic review. Arthroscopy. 2019;35:2222-2230. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  9. Grassi A, Ardern CL, Marcheggiani Muccioli GM, Neri MP, Marcacci M, Zaffagnini S. Does revision ACL reconstruction measure up to primary surgery? A meta-analysis comparing patient-reported and clinician-reported outcomes, and radiographic results. Br J Sports Med. 2016;50:716-724. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  10. Grossman MG, ElAttrache NS, Shields CL, Glousman RE. Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: three- to nine-year follow-up. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:418-423. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  11. Lefevre N, Klouche S, Mirouse G, Herman S, Gerometta A, Bohu Y. Return to sport after primary and revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective comparative study of 552 patients from the FAST cohort. A J Sports Med. 2017;45:34-41. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  12. Lysholm J, Gillquist J. Evaluation of knee ligament surgery results with special emphasis on use of a scoring scale. Am J Sports Med. 1982;10:150-154. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  13. Mall NA, Chalmers PN, Moric M, Tanaka MJ, Cole BJ, Bach BR, Paletta GA. Incidence and trends of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the United States. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42:2363-2370. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  14. Mitchell JJ, Cinque ME, Dornan GJ, Matheny LM, Dean CS, Kruckeberg B, Moatshe G, Chahla J, LaPrade RF. Primary versus revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: patient demographics, radiographic findings, and associated lesions. Arthroscopy. 2018;34:695-703. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  15. Mohan R, Webster KE, Johnson NR, Stuart MJ, Hewett TE, Krych AJ. Clinical outcomes in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Arthroscopy. 2018;34:289-300. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  16. Paša L, Pokorný V, Adler J. Řešení nestability kolenního kloubu artroskopicky prováděnou plastikou vazů pomocí alogenních štěpů. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2001;68:31-38. Go to PubMed...
  17. Sadovský P, Musil D, Stehlík J. Použití alogenních štěpů v chirurgii zkřížených vazů kolenního kloubu - část 1. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2005;72:293-296. Go to PubMed...
  18. Schlumberger M, Schuster P, Schulz M, Immendörfer M, Mayer P, Bartholomä J, Richter J. Traumatic graft rupture after primary and revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: retrospective analysis of incidence and risk factors in 2915 cases. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017;25:1535-1541. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  19. Sklenský J, Vališ P, Repko M, Rouchal M, Maršálek M, Hrůzová D. Úspěšnost kadaverózních náhrad předního zkříženého vazu kolenního kloubu se zaměřením na subjektivní spokojenost pacientů. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2017;84:106-113. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  20. Tegner Y, Lysholm J. Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985;198:43-49. Go to original source...
  21. Vališ P, Sklenský J, Repko M, Rouchal M, Novák J, Otaševič T. Nejčastější příčiny selhání autologních náhrad předního zkříženého vazu kolenního kloubu. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2014;81:371-379. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  22. Wilde J, Bedi A, Altchek DW. Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Sports Health. 2014;6:504-518. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  23. Yabroudi MA, Björnsson H, Lynch AD, Muller B, Samuelsson K, Tarabichi M, Karlsson J, Fu FH, Harner CD, Irrgang JJ. Predictors of revision surgery after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Orthop J Sportds Med. 2016;4:2325967116666039 Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  24. Zbrojkiewicz D, Vertullo C, Grayson JE. Increasing rates of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in young Australians, 2000-2015. Med J Aust. 2018;208:354-358. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...