Dajani, Khaled

Background There are sparse data available regarding outcome of meniscal repair performed at the time of ACL reconstruction in the pediatric and adolescent population. Purpose To review the results of meniscal repair performed at the time of ACL reconstruction in pediatric and adolescent patients. Study Design Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods The records of all patients age 18 years or younger who underwent meniscal repair at the time of ACL reconstruction between 1990 and 2005 were reviewed. Ninety-nine patients (56 female, 43 male) with an average age of 16 years (range, 13-18) were included. Average injury to surgery interval was 107 days (range, 2-1109). Clinical outcomes were assessed at a mean of 8 years postoperatively (range, 2-19). A multivariate model was used to compare this cohort with a previously published cohort of patients with isolated meniscal tears. Results The clinical success rate of meniscal repair was 84% for simple tears, 59% for displaced bucket-handle tears, and 57% for complex tears (74% overall). Twenty-six menisci (26% overall) failed repair and 25 patients underwent repeat arthroscopic surgery (19 partial meniscectomies, 6 re-repairs). The average Tegner and International Knee Documentation Committee scores were 6.2 (range, 2-10) and 90.3 (range, 52-100), respectively. Risk factors for failure included complex and bucket-handle tear (P = .01), medial meniscal tears (P = .03), and skeletal immaturity (P = .01). Compared with isolated meniscal repairs in a similar pediatric and adolescent population, complex tears repaired in combination with ACL reconstruction did significantly better (57% vs 13%; P = .004). Conclusion Clinically successful repair of meniscal tears treated at the time of ACL reconstruction in patients 18 years or younger depends on tear type, with complex and bucket-handle tears being negative prognostic factors. Complex tears have a higher rate of clinical success when repaired at the time of ACL reconstruction versus when repaired in isolation.

Background Treatment of the multiligament-injured knee remains controversial. Purpose To compare clinical and functional outcomes of a consecutive series of multiligament-injured knees that underwent repair of the fibular collateral ligament (FCL) and posterolateral corner (PLC), followed by delayed cruciate ligament reconstructions, with those that had single-stage multiligament reconstruction. Study Design Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods Patients with multiligament knee injury treated by a single surgeon were identified in our prospective database. Between February 2004 and May 2005, patients underwent repair of medial- and lateral-sided injuries, followed by delayed cruciate ligament reconstructions. Between May 2005 and February 2007, patients underwent single-stage multiligament knee reconstruction. All patients followed a standard rehabilitation protocol. Inclusion criteria were minimum 2-year follow-up and multiligament knee injury including the FCL/PLC. International Knee Documentation Committee subjective and Lysholm scores and objective clinical data were documented. Results We identified 45 knees (42 patients); 17 knees (14 patients) were excluded, leaving 28 knees (28 patients) in the study. The repair/staged group (10 knees in 10 patients) had a mean follow-up of 34 months (range, 24-49 months). The reconstruction group (18 knees in 18 patients) had a mean follow-up of 28 months (range, 24-41 months). Four of the 10 FCL/PLC repairs (40%) and 1 of the 18 FCL/PLC reconstructions (6%) failed (P = .04). After revision reconstructions, there were no statistically significant differences between mean International Knee Documentation Committee subjective scores (79 vs. 77, P = .92) and mean Lysholm scores (85 vs 88, P = .92). Regression analysis showed no effect on failure based on age, sex, injury mechanism, time to surgery, interval between stages, total number of ligaments injured, or location of tear. Conclusion Our series demonstrated a statistically significant higher rate of failure for repair compared with reconstruction of the FCL/PLC. Reconstruction of the FCL/PLC structures is a more reliable option than repair alone in the setting of a multiligament knee injury.

Purpose The purpose of this systematic review was to address the treatment of multiligament knee injuries, specifically ( 1 ) surgical versus nonoperative treatment, ( 2 ) repair versus reconstruction of injured ligamentous structures, and ( 3 ) early versus late surgery of damaged ligaments. Methods Two independent reviewers performed a search on PubMed from 1966 to August 2007 using the terms “knee dislocation,” “multiple ligament–injured knee,” and “multiligament knee reconstruction.” Study inclusion criteria were ( 1 ) levels I to IV evidence, ( 2 ) “multiligament” defined as disruption of at least 2 of the 4 major knee ligaments, ( 3 ) measures of functional and clinical outcome, and ( 4 ) minimum of 12 months' follow‐up, with a mean of at least 24 months. Results Four studies compared surgical treatment with nonoperative treatment. There was a higher percentage of excellent/good International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores (58% v 20%) in surgically treated patients, as well as higher rates for return to work (72% v 52%) and return to full sport (29% v 10%). Two studies compared repair with reconstruction of damaged structures, with similar mean Lysholm scores (88 v 87) and excellent/good IKDC scores (51% v 48%). However, repair of the posterolateral corner had a higher failure rate (37% v 9%). Similarly, repair of the cruciates yielded decreased stability and range of motion and a lower return to preinjury activity levels (0% v 33%). There were 5 studies comparing early surgery (≤3 weeks) with late surgery. Early treatment resulted in higher mean Lysholm scores (90 v 82) and a higher percentage of excellent/good IKDC scores (47% v 31%), as well as higher sports activity scores (89 v 69) on the Knee Outcome Survey. Conclusions Our review suggests that early operative treatment of the multiligament‐injured knee yields improved functional and clinical outcomes compared with nonoperative management or delayed surgery. Repair of the posterolateral corner may yield higher revision rates compared with reconstruction.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the functional and clinical outcomes of a consecutive series of patients who underwent fibular collateral ligament (FCL) and posterolateral corner (PLC) reconstruction by use of a single Achilles tendon allograft construct. Methods Patients were identified through prospective sports medicine databases at 2 academic institutions. Only patients who had undergone FCL and PLC reconstruction (as opposed to repair) were included. All patients followed a standard postoperative rehabilitation protocol. Various patterns of combined ligament injuries were included and divided into 2 groups (2 ligament v multiligament). Functional and clinical outcomes were assessed by clinical examination, Lysholm scores, and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective scores. Statistical analysis was performed by use of Wilcoxon paired rank‐sum tests and multivariate regression. Results We identified 16 knees in 16 patients, with a minimum of 2 years' follow‐up. There were 13 men and 3 women. The mean age was 30 years (range, 19 to 61 years). The mean length of clinical follow‐up was 30 months (range, 24 to 75 months). The mean International Knee Documentation Committee subjective scores were 80 points and 80 points ( P = .79) in the 2‐ligament and multiligament groups, respectively, and the mean Lysholm scores were 90 points and 89 points ( P = .96), respectively. Age ( P = .41), gender ( P = .84), and interval between injury and surgery ( P = .72) did not affect the clinical and functional outcomes between the 2 groups. Arthrofibrosis requiring manipulation developed in 1 patient. Residual varus laxity (1+) was noted in 4 patients, none of whom displayed functional instability. No patient has required revision reconstruction to date. Conclusions We describe a novel technique that takes into account the main static PLC stabilizers (FCL, popliteofibular ligament, and posterolateral capsule) that has not been previously reported. Our series showed no significant differences in clinical and functional outcomes between 2‐ligament and multiligament PLC‐based reconstructions. However, given the heterogeneity and small sample size of our study group, it is difficult to draw qualitative conclusions. Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic case series.

The records of patients aged 50 years or over who underwent primary reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament between 1990 and 2002 were reviewed. There were 35 knees in 34 patients that met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of the patients was 57 years (50 to 66) and the mean clinical follow-up was for 72 months (25 to 173). A total of 23 knees were reconstructed with patellar tendon allograft, and 12 with patellar tendon autograft. The mean pre-operative knee extension was 1° (−5° to 10°) and flexion was 129° (125° to 150°) and at follow-up these values were 0° (−5° to 5°) and 135° (120° to 150°), respectively. Pre-operatively there were 31 knees (89%) with a Lachman grade 2+ or 3+. Post-operatively, 33 knees (94%) were Lachman grade 0 or 1+. The mean pre- and post-operative International Knee Documentation Committee scores were 39 (23 to 72) and 90 (33 to 100) respectively. The mean pre- and post-operative Lysholm scores were 50 (18 to 68) and 92 (28 to 100) respectively and the mean University of California Los Angeles activity scores were 8.5 before injury (4 to 10), 4.3 (3 to 6) after injury and 8.3 (4 to 10) post-operatively. There were three graft failures (8.6%) requiring revision. We conclude that reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament in carefully-selected patients aged 50 years or over can achieve similar results to those in younger patients, with no increased risk of complications.