Additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis in revision ACL reconstruction does not influence the outcome of patients with low-grade anterior knee laxity

Standard

Additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis in revision ACL reconstruction does not influence the outcome of patients with low-grade anterior knee laxity. / Eggeling, Lena; Drenck, T C; Frings, J; Krause, M; Korthaus, Alexander; Krukenberg, Anna; Frosch, Karl-Heinz; Akoto, Ralph.

in: ARCH ORTHOP TRAUM SU, Jahrgang 142, Nr. 2, 02.2022, S. 291-299.

Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/ZeitungSCORING: ZeitschriftenaufsatzForschungBegutachtung

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{83de440905384866bbab788f8856a61c,
title = "Additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis in revision ACL reconstruction does not influence the outcome of patients with low-grade anterior knee laxity",
abstract = "INTRODUCTION: There is limited evidence on the indications of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in revision ACLR. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the LET in patients with revision ACLR with preoperative low-grade anterior knee laxity.METHODS: Between 2013 and 2018, 78 patients who underwent revision ACLR with preoperative low-grade anterior knee laxity [≤ 5 mm side-to-side difference (SSD)] were included in the retrospective cohort study. An additional modified Lemaire tenodesis was performed in 23 patients during revision ACLR and patients were clinically examined with a minimum of 2 years after revision surgery. Postoperative failure of the revision ACLR was defined as SSD in Rolimeter{\textregistered} testing ≥ 5 mm or pivot-shift grade 2/3.RESULTS: In total, failure of the revision ACLR occurred in 11.5% (n = 9) of the cases at a mean follow-up of 28.7 ± 8.8 (24-67) months. Patients with an additional LET and revision ACLR did not show a significantly reduced failure rate (13% vs. 11%) or an improved clinical outcome according to the postoperative functional scores or pain in regards to patients with an isolated revision ACLR (Tegner 5.7 ± 1.3 vs. 5.9 ± 1.5, n.s.; IKDC 77.5 ± 16.2 vs. 80.1 ± 14.9, n.s., Lysholm 81.9 ± 14.2 vs. 83.8 ± 14.5, n.s.; VAS 1.9 ± 2.2 vs. 1.2 ± 1.7, n.s.).CONCLUSIONS: An additional LET in patients with revision ACLR with low-grade anterior knee laxity does not influence patient-related outcomes or failure rates. Subjects with preoperative low-grade anterior knee laxity may not benefit from a LET in revision ACLR.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.",
author = "Lena Eggeling and Drenck, {T C} and J Frings and M Krause and Alexander Korthaus and Anna Krukenberg and Karl-Heinz Frosch and Ralph Akoto",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2021. The Author(s).",
year = "2022",
month = feb,
doi = "10.1007/s00402-021-04145-y",
language = "English",
volume = "142",
pages = "291--299",
journal = "ARCH ORTHOP TRAUM SU",
issn = "0936-8051",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis in revision ACL reconstruction does not influence the outcome of patients with low-grade anterior knee laxity

AU - Eggeling, Lena

AU - Drenck, T C

AU - Frings, J

AU - Krause, M

AU - Korthaus, Alexander

AU - Krukenberg, Anna

AU - Frosch, Karl-Heinz

AU - Akoto, Ralph

N1 - © 2021. The Author(s).

PY - 2022/2

Y1 - 2022/2

N2 - INTRODUCTION: There is limited evidence on the indications of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in revision ACLR. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the LET in patients with revision ACLR with preoperative low-grade anterior knee laxity.METHODS: Between 2013 and 2018, 78 patients who underwent revision ACLR with preoperative low-grade anterior knee laxity [≤ 5 mm side-to-side difference (SSD)] were included in the retrospective cohort study. An additional modified Lemaire tenodesis was performed in 23 patients during revision ACLR and patients were clinically examined with a minimum of 2 years after revision surgery. Postoperative failure of the revision ACLR was defined as SSD in Rolimeter® testing ≥ 5 mm or pivot-shift grade 2/3.RESULTS: In total, failure of the revision ACLR occurred in 11.5% (n = 9) of the cases at a mean follow-up of 28.7 ± 8.8 (24-67) months. Patients with an additional LET and revision ACLR did not show a significantly reduced failure rate (13% vs. 11%) or an improved clinical outcome according to the postoperative functional scores or pain in regards to patients with an isolated revision ACLR (Tegner 5.7 ± 1.3 vs. 5.9 ± 1.5, n.s.; IKDC 77.5 ± 16.2 vs. 80.1 ± 14.9, n.s., Lysholm 81.9 ± 14.2 vs. 83.8 ± 14.5, n.s.; VAS 1.9 ± 2.2 vs. 1.2 ± 1.7, n.s.).CONCLUSIONS: An additional LET in patients with revision ACLR with low-grade anterior knee laxity does not influence patient-related outcomes or failure rates. Subjects with preoperative low-grade anterior knee laxity may not benefit from a LET in revision ACLR.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

AB - INTRODUCTION: There is limited evidence on the indications of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in revision ACLR. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the LET in patients with revision ACLR with preoperative low-grade anterior knee laxity.METHODS: Between 2013 and 2018, 78 patients who underwent revision ACLR with preoperative low-grade anterior knee laxity [≤ 5 mm side-to-side difference (SSD)] were included in the retrospective cohort study. An additional modified Lemaire tenodesis was performed in 23 patients during revision ACLR and patients were clinically examined with a minimum of 2 years after revision surgery. Postoperative failure of the revision ACLR was defined as SSD in Rolimeter® testing ≥ 5 mm or pivot-shift grade 2/3.RESULTS: In total, failure of the revision ACLR occurred in 11.5% (n = 9) of the cases at a mean follow-up of 28.7 ± 8.8 (24-67) months. Patients with an additional LET and revision ACLR did not show a significantly reduced failure rate (13% vs. 11%) or an improved clinical outcome according to the postoperative functional scores or pain in regards to patients with an isolated revision ACLR (Tegner 5.7 ± 1.3 vs. 5.9 ± 1.5, n.s.; IKDC 77.5 ± 16.2 vs. 80.1 ± 14.9, n.s., Lysholm 81.9 ± 14.2 vs. 83.8 ± 14.5, n.s.; VAS 1.9 ± 2.2 vs. 1.2 ± 1.7, n.s.).CONCLUSIONS: An additional LET in patients with revision ACLR with low-grade anterior knee laxity does not influence patient-related outcomes or failure rates. Subjects with preoperative low-grade anterior knee laxity may not benefit from a LET in revision ACLR.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

U2 - 10.1007/s00402-021-04145-y

DO - 10.1007/s00402-021-04145-y

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 34455475

VL - 142

SP - 291

EP - 299

JO - ARCH ORTHOP TRAUM SU

JF - ARCH ORTHOP TRAUM SU

SN - 0936-8051

IS - 2

ER -