Inconsistent Return to Sport Despite Improved Outcomes After Re-revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction:
Conner P Olson1, Ahmed Mabrouk2, Daniel J Liechti3
1University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, U.S.A.
Purpose:
To systematically review the literature evaluating patient-reported outcomes and return to sport after re-revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) procedures. The secondary objectives were 2-fold: to identify the risk factors that lead to revision ACLR failure and to assess the secondary knee structure injuries after the initial revision ACLR.
Methods:
A systematic review of the literature was performed using the MEDLINE/PubMed and Cochrane databases. The inclusion criteria were outcomes of re-revision ACLR, minimum of 2 years' follow-up, human studies, and English language. Basic science articles, epidemiologic studies, editorials, surgical technique articles, surveys, cadaveric studies, and animal studies were excluded.
Results:
Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were considered for review. There were 6 Level III and 9 Level IV studies that included 399 patients undergoing re-revision ACLR. The rate of concomitant meniscal lesions at the time of re-revision ranged from 35% to 90%. The prevalence of concomitant cartilaginous lesions at the time of re-revision ranged from 13.6% to 90%. Compared with preoperative scores, patient-reported outcomes overall improved after re-revision ACLR, with mean preoperative Lysholm scores ranging from 38.4 to 73.15 that improved to postoperative scores ranging from 68 to 87.8. However, return to sport at preinjury levels was inconsistent, with rates ranging from 12.5% to 80%.
Conclusions:
Re-revision ACLR was found to restore knee stability and improve functional outcomes. Despite this improvement, there was a low rate of return to sport at the preinjury level. Functional outcomes were also inferior when compared with primary ACLR. In addition, concomitant knee pathologies were found to rise in prevalence compared with revision and primary ACLR cases.
Level Of Evidence:
Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.
More Related Videos
08:30Surgical Retrieval, Isolation and In vitro Expansion of Human Anterior Cruciate Ligament-derived Cells for Tissue Engineering Applications
Published on: April 30, 2014
05:44Author Spotlight: Double Posteromedial Approach for Treating Posterior Cruciate Ligament Cysts
Published on: October 20, 2023
