Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
, 5 (3), 156-163
eCollection

Combined Intra- And Extra-Articular Technique in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Affiliations

Combined Intra- And Extra-Articular Technique in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Jessica Zanovello et al. Joints.

Abstract

Purpose The aim of the study was to evaluate the "over the top" (OTT) nonanatomical technique for revision of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Methods Twenty-four patients with a mean age of 31.9 ± 11.2 years underwent revision of ACL reconstruction using OTT technique. International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Lysholm score, Tegner score, Subjective Patient Outcome for Return to Sport (SPORTS) score, Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport After Injury (ACL-RSI) scale, and KT-1000 evaluation were recorded at a mean follow-up of 30.7 ± 18.9 months. Results Postoperatively, the IKDC objective total score significantly improved ( p = 0.0046). The KOOS, Lysholm, and Tegner scores also improved, but the results were not statistically significant (62.4 vs. 72.6, 6.5 vs. 75.8, and 4.1 vs. 6.0, respectively). The subjective IKDC evaluation score improved from an average of 51.1 points to 63.7 points at the last follow-up ( p = 0.0027). The RTP prevalence was 81.8%, with 44.4% of the patients returning to the same preinjury level. According to the SPORTS score, 16.6% of patients played sport without limitations in activity and performance. The average ACL-RSI score was 52.1 ± 27.0. No major complications were reported. A total of 21.5% of patients underwent surgical removal of staples. The failure prevalence was 14.3% and the cumulative survivorship, calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, was equal to 70% at 60 months of follow-up. Conclusion The OTT technique in the revision ACL reconstruction provided improvement in objective and subjective scores, good RTP prevalence, and acceptable rate of complication and failure. One of the advantages was the possibility to avoid the femoral tunnel. Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Keywords: anterior cruciate ligament; over the top; revision.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Reasons for nonreturn to sport or return to sport at a lower level than the preinjury period.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Distribution of SPORTS score.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Survivorship calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 3 PubMed Central articles

References

    1. Spindler K P, Wright R W. Clinical practice. Anterior cruciate ligament tear. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(20):2135–2142. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mall N A, Chalmers P N, Moric M et al. Incidence and trends of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the United States. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(10):2363–2370. - PubMed
    1. Wright R W, Dunn W R, Amendola A et al. Risk of tearing the intact anterior cruciate ligament in the contralateral knee and rupturing the anterior cruciate ligament graft during the first 2 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective MOON cohort study. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(07):1131–1134. - PubMed
    1. Barber-Westin S D, Noyes F R. Factors used to determine return to unrestricted sports activities after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2011;27(12):1697–1705. - PubMed
    1. Irrgang J J, Anderson A F, Boland A L et al. Development and validation of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29(05):600–613. - PubMed
Feedback