Search

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is one of the most common orthopaedic procedures and one of the most well studied. Despite extensive research dedicated to ACLR, there is limited understanding of how chronic inflammatory systemic diseases (CIDs) such as rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus affect outcomes., Purpose: To compare the outcomes of ACLR in cohorts of patients with and without CID., Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: A retrospective query of a regional data set was conducted for all patients who underwent ACLR from 1990 to 2021 for traumatic ACL rupture. All patients with CID were identified and propensity matched to non-CID controls. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were identified through retrospective chart review, and patients were contacted for subjective outcomes., Results: A total of 30 patients with ACLR and a diagnosis of CID were identified. These patients were propensity matched to 120 non-CID controls. Baseline demographic and surgical characteristics demonstrated no statistical differences. Follow-up duration was similar between the CID and non-CID groups (mean, 14.6 vs 14.2 years; P = .868). The CID cohort had a higher arthrofibrosis rate (16.7% vs 4.3%; P = .031), higher osteoarthritis rate (33.3% vs 16.7%; P = .041), higher total knee arthroplasty (TKA) rate (16.7% vs 3.3%; P = .016), and earlier time to TKA (14.7 vs 23.5 years; P = .032). Knee range of motion, infection rate, retear rate, time to retear, and time to osteoarthritis were not statistically different between the cohorts. The CID cohort had higher visual analog scale pain scores (mean, 2.00 vs 1.20; P = .043) but slightly higher satisfaction (mean, 3.92 vs 3.39; P = .043). There were no differences in preinjury Tegner, postoperative Tegner, change in Tegner, or IKDC score. In a univariate Cox regression model, the CID cohort had a retear hazard ratio of 1.43 (95% CI, 0.46-4.51; P = .537). Kaplan-Meier survival revealed no significant differences in retear-free survival between the CID and non-CID cohorts at 25 years (85.7% vs 87.3%; P = .53). The CID cohort had a TKA hazard ratio of 3.94 (95% CI, 1.05-14.8; P = .042). Kaplan-Meier survival demonstrated significantly decreased TKA-free survival at 25 years in the CID cohort (64.9% vs 91.2%; P = .029)., Conclusion: CID increases the incidence of arthrofibrosis, osteoarthritis, and TKA in those undergoing ACLR. Patients with CID also undergo TKA significantly sooner than non-CID counterparts. Notably, the majority of patient-reported outcome measures are no worse in patients who have a CID diagnosis. Thus, ACLR constructs themselves may not necessarily fare worse in patients with CID. Nonetheless, these patients need to be cautiously counseled on the clinical outlook after their ACLR., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: C.L.C. has received consulting fees and support for education from Arthrex. D.B.F.S. has received consulting fees from Smith & Nephew, Phoenix Kinetic, and Relive Biotechnologies; nonconsulting fees from Aesculap Biologics, LLC; and research support from JRF. K.R.O. has received consulting fees from Arthrex, Inc, Smith & Nephew, and Endo Pharmaceuticals; support for education from Gemini Medical, Smith & Nephew, Arthrex, Endo Pharmaceuticals, Pinnnacle, Inc, Foundation Medical, and Medwest Associates; speaking fees from Synthes GmbH; hospitality payments from Stryker, Wright Medical Technology, Medical Device Business Services, and Zimmer Biomet; and a grant from Arthrex. A.J.T. has received hospitality payments from Stryker, Arthrex, Medical Device Business Services, and Zimmer Biomet Holdings. M.H. has received education payments from Arthrex, Foundation Medical, Medwest Associates, and Smith & Nephew; honoraria from Encore Medical; hospitality payments from Orthalign, Stryker, and Medical Device Business Services; consulting fees from Vericel, DJO-Enovis, Moximed, and Vericel; support for education Smith & Nephew and Medwest Associates; and hospitality payments from Medical Device Business Services. A.J.K. has received consulting fees from Arthrex, Ceterix, Gemini Mountain Medical, Joint Restoration Foundation, Responsive Arthroscopy, and Smith & Nephew; royalties from Arthrex and Responsive Arthroscopy; a grant from DJO; honoraria from Joint Restoration Foundation and Musculoskeletal Transplant; and research support from Aesculap/B. Braun, Arthritis Foundation, Ceterix, and Histogenics. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.

The anterolateral ligament (ALL) was first described in 1879 in the context of Segond fractures, which correlate with a 75-100% chance of an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear or a 66-75% chance of a meniscal tear. The purpose of this paper is to provide an updated comprehensive review on the anterolateral ligament complex of the knee focusing on the: (1) anatomy of the ALL/ALC; (2) associated biomechanics/function; and (3) important surgical considerations in contemporary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). A systematic review of studies on ALL was conducted on Pubmed/MEDLINE and Cochrane databases (May 7th, 2020 to February 1st, 2022), with 20 studies meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were anatomical/biomechanical studies assessing ALL function, cadaveric and computer simulations, and comparative studies on surgical outcomes of ALLR (concomitant with ACL reconstruction). Eight studies were included and graded by MINOR and Newcastle-Ottawa scale to identify potential biases. The anatomy of the ALL is part of the anterolateral ligament complex (ALC), which includes the superficial/deep iliotibial band (including the Kaplan fiber system), iliopatellar band, ALL, and anterolateral capsule. Multiple biomechanical studies have characterized the ALC as a secondary passive stabilizer in resisting tibial internal rotation. Given the role of the ALC in resisting internal tibial rotation, lateral extra-articular procedures including ALL augmentation may be considered for chronic ACL tears, ACL revisions, and a high-grade pivot shift test. In the context of TKA, in the event of injury to the ALC, a more constrained implant or soft-tissue reconstruction may be necessary to restore appropriate knee stability., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Lateral meniscal oblique radial tears (LMORTs) are the most common type of lateral meniscal tears and occur concomitantly with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears in up to 12% of cases. Four types of LMORTs have been classified in the literature based on proximity to the meniscal root and extent of the tear. Type 1 and 2 LMORTs represent partial and complete posterior root tears less than 10 mm from the root insertion. Type 3 and 4 LMORTs are partial and complete posterior radial meniscus tears greater than 10 mm from the root insertion. Indications: Type 3 and 4 LMORTs can and should be addressed with an all-inside side-to-side repair at the time of ACL reconstruction. LMORTs that are not repaired at the time of ACL reconstruction can contribute to persistent instability and meniscal extrusion. Technique Description: Diagnostic arthroscopy is performed to evaluate the posterior aspects of both the medial and lateral meniscus. The medial leaflet is commonly flipped into the notch and scarred to ACL remnant. After identifying and isolating the medial leaflet, an arthroscopic suture passer is used to pass a suture from inferior to superior through the medial leaflet. A second suture is passed from inferior to superior through the lateral leaflet. This is used to shuttle the suture pass through the medial leaflet to the bottom of the meniscus, where it can be tied in a horizontal mattress fashion. The sutures are tied down with aide of an arthroscopic knot pusher. A second set of sutures is passed and used to shuttle a second suture that would be tied posterior to the first suture, again in a horizontal mattress fashion. This allows reduction of the fragments in apposition across the tear. Postoperatively, patients are allowed range of motion from 0° to 90° and to toe touch weightbearing for the first 4 weeks. Patients are advanced to weightbearing as tolerated at 5 weeks. Typical return to sport ranges from 6 to 9 months postoperatively. Results: Results have been published for 2-year outcomes of type 3 and 4 LMORT repairs and have demonstrated persistent improved patient-reported outcomes as well as healing rates that are greater than 80% and in some series approach nearly 100%. Discussion/Conclusion: Arthroscopic all-inside side-to-side surgical repair is a durable and reliable treatment option for patients presenting for ACL reconstruction with concomitant type 3 or 4 LMORT. Patient Consent Disclosure Statement: The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]