Evaluation of Failed ACL Reconstruction: An Updated Review

Bryson Kemler,1 Carlo Coladonato,1 John Hayden Sonnier,1 Michael P Campbell,1 Danielle Darius,2 Brandon J Erickson,1 Fotios Paul Tjoumakaris,1 Kevin B Freedman1 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rothman Institute, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 2Department of Education, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USACorrespondence: Kevin B Freedman, Rothman Orthopaedics at Thomas Jefferson University, 825 Old Lancaster Road, Suite 200, Bryn Mawr, Philadelphia, PA, 19010, USA, Email [email protected]: Failure rates among primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR) range from 3.2% to 11.1%. Recently, there has been increased focus on surgical and anatomic considerations which predispose patients to failure, including excessive posterior tibial slope (PTS), unaddressed high-grade pivot shift, and improper tunnel placement. The purpose of this review was to provide a current summary and analysis of the literature regarding patient-related and technical factors surrounding revision ACLR, rehabilitation considerations, overall outcomes and return to sport (RTS) for patients who undergo revision ACLR. There is a convincingly higher re-tear and revision rate in patients who undergo ACLR with allograft than autograft, especially amongst the young, athletic population. Unrecognized Posterior Cruciate Ligament (PLC) injury is a common cause of ACLR failure and current literature suggests concurrent operative management of high-grade PLC injuries. Given the high rates of revision surgery in young active patients who return to pivoting sports, the authors recommend strong consideration of a combined ACLR + Anterolateral Ligament (ALL) or Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) procedure in this population. Excessive PTS has been identified as an independent risk factor for ACL graft failure. Careful consideration of patient-specific factors such as age and activity level may influence the success of ACL reconstruction. Additional technical considerations including graft choice and fixation method, tunnel position, evaluation of concomitant posterolateral corner and high-grade pivot shift injuries, and the role of excessive posterior tibial slope may play a significant role in preventing failure.Keywords: ACL, anterior cruciate ligament, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, failed ACL graft, posterior tibial slope, revision ACL reconstructio

The results of arthroscopic anterior stabilisation of the shoulder using the bioknotless anchor system

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Shoulder instability is a common condition, particularly affecting a young, active population. Open capsulolabral repair is effective in the majority of cases, however arthroscopic techniques, particularly using suture anchors, are being used with increasing success.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>15 patients with shoulder instability were operated on by a single surgeon (VK) using BioKnotless anchors (DePuy Mitek, Raynham, MA). The average length of follow-up was 21 months (17 to 31) with none lost to follow-up. Constant scores in both arms, patient satisfaction, activity levels and recurrence of instability was recorded.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>80% of patients were satisfied with their surgery. 1 patient suffered a further dislocation and another had recurrent symptomatic instability. The average constant score returned to 84% of that measured in the opposite (unaffected) shoulder. There were no specific post-operative complications encountered.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In terms of recurrence of symptoms, our results show success rates comparable to other methods of shoulder stabilisation. This technique is safe and surgeons familiar with shoulder arthroscopy will not encounter a steep learning curve. Shoulder function at approximately 2 years post repair was good or excellent in the majority of patients and it was observed that patient satisfaction was correlated more with return to usual activities than recurrence of symptoms.</p

Objective consensus from decision trees

BackgroundConsensus-based approaches provide an alternative to evidence-based decision making, especially in situations where high-level evidence is limited. Our aim was to demonstrate a novel source of information, objective consensus based on recommendations in decision tree format from multiple sources.MethodsBased on nine sample recommendations in decision tree format a representative analysis was performed. The most common (mode) recommendations for each eventuality (each permutation of parameters) were determined. The same procedure was applied to real clinical recommendations for primary radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Data was collected from 16 radiation oncology centres, converted into decision tree format and analyzed in order to determine the objective consensus.ResultsBased on information from multiple sources in decision tree format, treatment recommendations can be assessed for every parameter combination. An objective consensus can be determined by means of mode recommendations without compromise or confrontation among the parties. In the clinical example involving prostate cancer therapy, three parameters were used with two cut-off values each (Gleason score, PSA, T-stage) resulting in a total of 27 possible combinations per decision tree. Despite significant variations among the recommendations, a mode recommendation could be found for specific combinations of parameters.ConclusionRecommendations represented as decision trees can serve as a basis for objective consensus among multiple parties