Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2016; 29(06): 464-470
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1564725
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Military Personnel

George C. Balazs
1   Department of Orthopaedics, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
,
Patrick D. Grimm
1   Department of Orthopaedics, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
,
Michael A. Donohue
1   Department of Orthopaedics, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, Maryland
,
David J. Keblish
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Naval Health Clinic Annapolis, US Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland
,
John-Paul Rue
2   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Naval Health Clinic Annapolis, US Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

17 May 2015

23 August 2015

Publication Date:
02 November 2015 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This study aims to report the clinical and functional outcomes of revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in a young, active duty military population. Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction were enrolled in an institutional clinical database and followed prospectively. The primary outcomes were patients' scores on a timed run, as compared with recorded scores before reinjury. Secondary outcomes included scores on the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective (IKDC subjective), the Short Form - 36 health survey (SF-36) version 2, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and the Tegner activity scale. A total of 13 patients were identified who met the inclusion criteria and had complete follow-up. The mean age at revision ACL reconstruction was 20.5 years (range, 19–22 years), and mean follow-up was 40.2 months (range, 13–66 months). All patients underwent a single stage revision ACL reconstruction with ipsilateral bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft, ipsilateral hamstring autograft, or bone-tendon-bone allograft. Mean physical readiness test (PRT) score at final follow-up was not statistically different than documented preinjury PRT score (77.9 vs. 85.5, p > 0.05), nor was the mean run time (7:12 vs. 6:43/mile, p > 0.05). Significant improvements exceeding published minimal clinically important differences were seen in SANE score, SF-36 physical component summary score, KOOS sports and recreation, KOOS quality of life, WOMAC pain score, and WOMAC function score. Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction at our facility show good recovery of baseline physical performance as measured by the semiannual PRT and timed run test, and significant improvements in patient-reported outcome scores.

Level of Evidence Level IV, case series.

Keywords

revision ACL reconstruction - military - knee - instability
 

  • References

  • 1 Csintalan RP, Inacio MCS, Funahashi TT. Incidence rate of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Perm J 2008; 12 (3) 17-21
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Mall NA, Chalmers PN, 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kamath GV, Redfern JC, Greis PE, Burks RT. Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 2011; 39 (1) 199-217
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 MARS Group ; MARS Group. Effect of graft choice on the outcome of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) Cohort. Am J Sports Med 2014; 42 (10) 2301-2310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kvist J, Kartus J, Karlsson J, Forssblad M. Results from the Swedish national anterior cruciate ligament register. Arthroscopy 2014; 30 (7) 803-810
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Lind M, Menhert F, Pedersen AB. Incidence and outcome after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from the Danish registry for knee ligament reconstructions. Am J Sports Med 2012; 40 (7) 1551-1557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gifstad T, Drogset JO, Viset A, Grøntvedt T, Hortemo GS. Inferior results after revision ACL reconstructions: a comparison with primary ACL reconstructions. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013; 21 (9) 2011-2018
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Kievit AJ, Jonkers FJ, Barentsz JH, Blankevoort L. A cross-sectional study comparing the rates of osteoarthritis, laxity, and quality of life in primary and revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Arthroscopy 2013; 29 (5) 898-905
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Battaglia II MJ, Cordasco FA, Hannafin JA , et al. Results of revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery. Am J Sports Med 2007; 35 (12) 2057-2066
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Denti M, Lo Vetere D, Bait C, Schönhuber H, Melegati G, Volpi P. Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: causes of failure, surgical technique, and clinical results. Am J Sports Med 2008; 36 (10) 1896-1902
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Lind M, Lund B, Faunø P, Said S, Miller LL, Christiansen SE. Medium to long-term follow-up after ACL revision. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012; 20 (1) 166-172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Ahn JH, Lee YS, Ha HC. Comparison of revision surgery with primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and outcome of revision surgery between different graft materials. Am J Sports Med 2008; 36 (10) 1889-1895
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Flanigan DC, Everhart JS, Pedroza A, Smith T, Kaeding CC. Fear of reinjury (kinesiophobia) and persistent knee symptoms are common factors for lack of return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 2013; 29 (8) 1322-1329
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Ardern CL, Taylor NF, Feller JA, Whitehead TS, Webster KE. Psychological responses matter in returning to preinjury level of sport after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41 (7) 1549-1558
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Lentz TA, Tillman SM, Indelicato PA, Moser MW, George SZ, Chmielewski TL. Factors associated with function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Sports Health 2009; 1 (1) 47-53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Ardern CL, Österberg A, Tagesson S, Gauffin H, Webster KE, Kvist J. The impact of psychological readiness to return to sport and recreational activities after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Br J Sports Med 2014; 48 (22) 1613-1619
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Monticone M, Ferrante S, Salvaderi S, Motta L, Cerri C. Responsiveness and minimal important changes for the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score in subjects undergoing rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2013; 92 (10) 864-870
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Greco NJ, Anderson AF, Mann BJ , et al. Responsiveness of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form in comparison to the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, modified Cincinnati Knee Rating System, and Short Form 36 in patients with focal articular cartilage defects. Am J Sports Med 2010; 38 (5) 891-902
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G. Smallest detectable and minimal clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 45 (4) 384-391
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Winterstein AP, McGuine TA, Carr KE, Hetzel SJ. Comparison of IKDC and SANE outcome measures following knee injury in active female patients. Sports Health 2013; 5 (6) 523-529
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Crawford K, Briggs KK, Rodkey WG, Steadman JR. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the IKDC score for meniscus injuries of the knee. Arthroscopy 2007; 23 (8) 839-844
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL , et al; International Knee Documentation Committee. Responsiveness of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34 (10) 1567-1573
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Leroux T, Wasserstein D, Dwyer T , et al. The epidemiology of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in Ontario, Canada. Am J Sports Med 2014; 42 (11) 2666-2672
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Chougule S, Tselentakis G, Stefan S, Stefanakis G. Revision of failed anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with quadrupled semitendinosus allograft: intermediate-term outcome. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2015; 25 (3) 515-523
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Diamantopoulos AP, Lorbach O, Paessler HH. Anterior cruciate ligament revision reconstruction: results in 107 patients. Am J Sports Med 2008; 36 (5) 851-860
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Mahmoud SS, Odak S, Coogan S, McNicholas MJ. A prospective study to assess the outcomes of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Int Orthop 2014; 38 (7) 1489-1494
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Pascual-Garrido C, Carbo L, Makino A. Revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with allografts in patients younger than 40 years old: a 2 to 4 year results. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2014; 22 (5) 1106-1111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Ahn JH, Lee YS, Chang MJ, Yim HS. Analysis of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction according to the combined injury, degenerative change, and MRI findings. Knee 2011; 18 (6) 382-386
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Griffith TB, Allen BJ, Levy BA, Stuart MJ, Dahm DL. Outcomes of repeat revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41 (6) 1296-1301
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Salmon LJ, Pinczewski LA, Russell VJ, Refshauge K. Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendon autograft: 5- to 9-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34 (10) 1604-1614
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Magnussen RA, Trojani C, Granan LP , et al. MARS Group; SFA Revision ACL Group. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics in ACL revision: a comparison of French, Norwegian, and North American cohorts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2015; 23 (8) 2339-2348
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Granan L-P, Forssblad M, Lind M, Engebretsen L. The Scandinavian ACL registries 2004-2007: baseline epidemiology. Acta Orthop 2009; 80 (5) 563-567
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Reinhardt KR, Hammoud S, Bowers AL, Umunna BP, Cordasco FA. Revision ACL reconstruction in skeletally mature athletes younger than 18 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (3) 835-842
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Shelbourne KD, Benner RW, Gray T. Return to Sports and Subsequent Injury Rates After Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Patellar Tendon Autograft. Am J Sports Med 2014; 42 (6) 1395-1400
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar