Back to Authors

Andrish, Jack T.

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3968-0683

Mayo Clinic

Cleveland Clinic

Citations 4

Meniscal and Articular Cartilage Predictors of Outcome After Revision ACL Reconstruction: A 6-Year Follow-up Cohort Study
Group, The MARS, Wright, Rick W. , Haas, Amanda K. , Pennings, Jacquelyn S. , Cooper, Daniel E. , Dunn, Warren R. , Lantz, Brett A., Albright, John P., Amendola, Annunziato , Andrish, Jack T. , Annunziata, Christopher C., Arciero, Robert A. , Bach, Bernard R. , Baker, Champ L., Bartolozzi, Arthur R. , Baumgarten, Keith M. , Bechler, Jeffery R., Berg, Jeffrey H., Bernas, Geoffrey A., Brockmeier, Stephen F. , Bush‐Joseph, Charles A., Butler, J. Brad, Carey, James L. , Carpenter, James E. , Cole, Brian J. , Cooper, Jonathan M. , Cox, Charles L. , Creighton, R. Alexander , Dahm, Diane L., Flanigan, David C. , Frederick, Robert W., Ganley, Theodore J. , Garofoli, Elizabeth A. , Gatt, Charles J. , Gecha, Steven R., Hame, Sharon L. , Hannafin, Jo A., Harner, Christopher D. , Harris, Norman Lindsay, Hechtman, Keith S., Hershman, Elliott B., Hoellrich, Rudolf G., Johnson, David C. , Kaeding, Christopher C. , Kamath, Ganesh V. , Klootwyk, Thomas E., Levy, Bruce A. , Benjamin, C. , Maiers, G. Peter, Marx, Robert G. , Matava, Matthew J. , Mathien, Gregory M., McCarty, Eric C. , McCormack, Robert G. , Miller, Bruce S. , Nissen, Carl W. , O’Neill, Daniel F., Parker, Richard D., Purnell, Mark L., Ramappa, Arun J. , Rauh, Michael A. , Rettig, Arthur C., Sekiya, Jon K., Slauterbeck, James R., Smith, Matthew V. , Spang, Jeffrey T. , Svoboda, LTC Steven J., Taft, Timothy N., Tenuta, Joachim J., Tingstad, Edwin M., Vidal, Armando F. , Viskontas, Darius G., White, Richard A., Williams, James S., Wolcott, Michelle L., York, James J. , Svoboda, Steven J. , McCarty, Eric C , Group, The MARS, Huston, Laura J. , Allen, Christina R. , DeBerardino, Thomas M. , Spindler, Kurt P , Stuart, Michael J. , Brophy, Robert H. , Campbell, John , David, Tal S. , Giffin, J. Robert , Johnson, David C., Johnson, Timothy S. , Jones, Morgan H. , Marx, Robert G. , McAllister, David R. , Owens, Brett D. , Shea, Kevin G. , Sherman, Orrin H. , Vidal, Armando F. , Wolf, Brian R.

The American Journal of Sports Medicine | February 3, 2023 | Volume: 51 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 605-614

10.1177/03635465231151389 Get It

Background: Meniscal and chondral damage is common in the patient undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Purpose: To determine if meniscal and/or articular cartilage pathology at the time of revision ACL surgery significantly influences a patient’s outcome at 6-year follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction were prospectively enrolled between 2006 and 2011. Data collection included baseline demographics, surgical technique, pathology, treatment, and scores from 4 validated patient-reported outcome instruments: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Marx Activity Rating Scale. Patients were followed up at 6 years and asked to complete the identical set of outcome instruments. Regression analysis assessed the meniscal and articular cartilage pathology risk factors for clinical outcomes 6 years after revision ACL reconstruction. Results: An overall 1234 patients were enrolled (716 males, 58%; median age, 26 years). Surgeons reported the pathology at the time of revision surgery in the medial meniscus (45%), lateral meniscus (36%), medial femoral condyle (43%), lateral femoral condyle (29%), medial tibial plateau (11%), lateral tibial plateau (17%), patella (30%), and trochlea (21%). Six-year follow-up was obtained on 79% of the sample (980/1234). Meniscal pathology and articular cartilage pathology (medial femoral condyle, lateral femoral condyle, lateral tibial plateau, trochlea, and patella) were significant drivers of poorer patient-reported outcomes at 6 years (IKDC, KOOS, WOMAC, and Marx). The most consistent factors driving outcomes were having a medial meniscal excision (either before or at the time of revision surgery) and patellofemoral articular cartilage pathology. Six-year Marx activity levels were negatively affected by having either a repair/excision of the medial meniscus (odds ratio range, 1.45-1.72; P≤ .04) or grade 3-4 patellar chondrosis (odds ratio, 1.72; P = .04). Meniscal pathology occurring before the index revision surgery negatively affected scores on all KOOS subscales except for sports/recreation ( P < .05). Articular cartilage pathology significantly impaired all KOOS subscale scores ( P < .05). Lower baseline outcome scores, higher body mass index, being a smoker, and incurring subsequent surgery all significantly increased the odds of reporting poorer clinical outcomes at 6 years. Conclusion: Meniscal and chondral pathology at the time of revision ACL reconstruction has continued significant detrimental effects on patient-reported outcomes at 6 years after revision surgery.
Association Between Graft Choice and 6-Year Outcomes of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in the MARS Cohort
Group, MARS, Wright, Rick W. , Huston, Laura J. , Haas, Amanda K. , Pennings, Jacquelyn S. , Cooper, Daniel E. , Dunn, Warren R. , Lantz, Brett A., Stuart, Michael J., Albright, John P., Amendola, Annunziato , Andrish, Jack T. , Annunziata, Christopher C., Arciero, Robert A. , Bach, Bernard R. , Baker, Champ L., Bartolozzi, Arthur R. , Baumgarten, Keith M. , Bechler, Jeffery R., Berg, Jeffrey H., Bernas, Geoffrey A., Brockmeier, Stephen F. , Brophy, Robert H. , Bush‐Joseph, Charles A., Butler, J. Brad, Campbell, John D. , Carey, James L. , Carpenter, James E. , Cole, Brian J. , Cooper, Jonathan M. , Cox, Charles L. , Creighton, R. Alexander , Dahm, Diane L., Flanigan, David C. , Frederick, Robert W., Ganley, Theodore J. , Garofoli, Elizabeth A. , Gatt, Charles J. , Gecha, Steven R., Hame, Sharon L. , Hannafin, Jo A., Harner, Christopher D. , Harris, Norman Lindsay, Hechtman, Keith S., Hershman, Elliott B., Hoellrich, Rudolf G., Johnson, David C. , Johnson, Timothy S. , Kaeding, Christopher C. , Kamath, Ganesh V. , Klootwyk, Thomas E., Levy, Bruce A. , Benjamin, C. , Maiers, G. Peter, Marx, Robert G. , Matava, Matthew J. , Mathien, Gregory M., McCarty, Eric C. , McCormack, Robert G. , Miller, Bruce S. , Nissen, Carl W. , O’Neill, Daniel F., Parker, Richard D., Purnell, Mark L., Ramappa, Arun J. , Rauh, Michael A. , Rettig, Arthur C., Sekiya, Jon K., Slauterbeck, James R., Smith, Matthew V. , Spang, Jeffrey T. , Svoboda, LTC Steven J., Taft, Timothy N., Tenuta, Joachim J., Tingstad, Edwin M., Vidal, Armando F. , Viskontas, Darius G., White, Richard A., Wolcott, Michelle L., Wolf, Brian R. , York, James J. , Svoboda, Steven J. , Brophy, Robert H. , McCarty, Eric C , Group, MARS, Allen, Christina R. , DeBerardino, Thomas M. , Spindler, Kurt P , Stuart, Michael J., Campbell, John D., David, Tal S. , Giffin, J. Robert , Johnson, David C., Jones, Morgan H. , McAllister, David R. , Owens, Brett D. , Shea, Kevin G. , Sherman, Orrin H. , Williams, James S.

The American Journal of Sports Medicine | July 14, 2021 | Volume: 49 | Issue: 10 | Pages: 2589-2598

10.1177/03635465211027170 Get It

Background: Although graft choice may be limited in the revision setting based on previously used grafts, most surgeons believe that graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is an important factor related to outcome. Hypothesis: In the ACL revision setting, there would be no difference between autograft and allograft in rerupture rate and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) at 6-year follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients who had revision surgery were identified and prospectively enrolled in this cohort study by 83 surgeons over 52 sites. Data collected included baseline characteristics, surgical technique and pathology, and a series of validated PRO measures. Patients were followed up at 6 years and asked to complete the identical set of PRO instruments. Incidence of additional surgery and reoperation because of graft failure were also recorded. Multivariable regression models were used to determine the predictors (risk factors) of PROs, graft rerupture, and reoperation at 6 years after revision surgery. Results: A total of 1234 patients including 716 (58%) men were enrolled. A total of 325 (26%) underwent revision using a bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) autograft; 251 (20%), soft tissue autograft; 289 (23%), BTB allograft; 302 (25%), soft tissue allograft; and 67 (5%), other graft. Questionnaires and telephone follow-up for subsequent surgery information were obtained for 809 (66%) patients, while telephone follow-up was only obtained for an additional 128 patients for the total follow-up on 949 (77%) patients. Graft choice was a significant predictor of 6-year Marx Activity Rating Scale scores ( P = .024). Specifically, patients who received a BTB autograft for revision reconstruction had higher activity levels than did patients who received a BTB allograft (odds ratio [OR], 1.92; 95% CI, 1.25-2.94). Graft rerupture was reported in 5.8% (55/949) of patients by their 6-year follow-up: 3.5% (16/455) of patients with autografts and 8.4% (37/441) of patients with allografts. Use of a BTB autograft for revision resulted in patients being 4.2 times less likely to sustain a subsequent graft rupture than if a BTB allograft were utilized ( P = .011; 95% CI, 1.56-11.27). No significant differences were found in graft rerupture rates between BTB autograft and soft tissue autografts ( P = .87) or between BTB autografts and soft tissue allografts ( P = .36). Use of an autograft was found to be a significant predictor of having fewer reoperations within 6 years compared with using an allograft ( P = .010; OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.36-0.87). Conclusion: BTB and soft tissue autografts had a decreased risk in graft rerupture compared with BTB allografts. BTB autografts were associated with higher activity level than were BTB allografts at 6 years after revision reconstruction. Surgeons and patients should consider this information when choosing a graft for revision ACL reconstruction.
Rate of infection following revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and associated patient‐ and surgeon‐dependent risk factors: Retrospective results from MOON and MARS data collected from 2002 to 2011
Group, MARS, Brophy, Robert H. , Wright, Rick W. , Huston, Laura J. , Haas, Amanda K. , Anderson, Allen F., Cooper, Daniel E. , Dunn, Warren R. , Lantz, Brett A., Mann, Barton J., Albright, John P., Amendola, Annunziato, Andrish, Jack T. , Annunziata, Christopher C., Arciero, Robert A. , Bach, Bernard R. , Baker, Champ L., Bartolozzi, Arthur R. , Baumgarten, Keith M. , Bechler, Jeffery R., Berg, Jeffrey H., Bernas, Geoffrey A., Brockmeier, Stephen F. , Bush‐Joseph, Charles A., Butler, J. Brad, Carey, James L. , Carpenter, James E. , Cole, Brian J. , Cox, Charles L. , Creighton, R. Alexander , Dahm, Diane L., Flanigan, David C. , Frederick, Robert W., Ganley, Theodore J. , Garofoli, Elizabeth A. , Gatt, Charles J. , Gecha, Steven R., Giffin, J. Robert , Hame, Sharon L. , Hannafin, Jo A., Harner, Christopher D. , Harris, Norman Lindsay, Hechtman, Keith S., Hershman, Elliott B., Hoellrich, Rudolf G., Hosea, Timothy M., Johnson, David C. , Johnson, Timothy S. , Kaeding, Christopher C. , Kamath, Ganesh V. , Klootwyk, Thomas E., Levy, Bruce A. , Benjamin, Chunbong, Maiers, G. Peter, Marx, Robert G. , Matava, Matthew J. , Mathien, Gregory M., McAllister, David R. , McCarty, Eric C. , McCormack, Robert G. , Miller, Bruce S. , Nissen, Carl W. , O’Neill, Daniel F., Parker, Richard D., Purnell, Mark L., Ramappa, Arun J. , Rauh, Michael A. , Rettig, Arthur C., Sekiya, Jon K., Sherman, Orrin H. , Li, Xulei, Slauterbeck, James R., Smith, Matthew V. , Spang, Jeffrey T. , Svoboda, LTC Steven J., Taft, Timothy N., Tenuta, Joachim J., Tingstad, Edwin M., Vidal, Armando F. , Viskontas, Darius G., White, Richard A., Williams, James S., Wolcott, Michelle L., Wolf, Brian R. , York, James J. , Svoboda, Steven J. , Brophy, Robert H. , McCarty, Eric C , Group, MARS, Allen, Christina R. , DeBerardino, Thomas M. , Mann, Barton, Spindler, Kurt P , Stuart, Michael J., Campbell, John , Cooper, Jonathan M., David, Tal S. , Johnson, David C., Jones, Morgan H. , Owens, Brett D. , Shea, Kevin G. , Li, Xulei

Journal of Orthopaedic Research | October 1, 2020 | Volume: 39 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 274-280

10.1002/jor.24871 Get It

AbstractInfection is a rare occurrence after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (rACLR). Because of the low rates of infection, it has been difficult to identify risk factors for infection in this patient population. The purpose of this study was to report the rate of infection following rACLR and assess whether infection is associated with patient‐ and surgeon‐dependent risk factors. We reviewed two large prospective cohorts to identify patients with postoperative infections following rACLR. Age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, history of diabetes, and graft choice were recorded for each patient. The association of these factors with postoperative infection following rACLR was assessed. There were 1423 rACLR cases in the combined cohort, with 9 (0.6%) reporting postoperative infections. Allografts had a higher risk of infection than autografts (odds ratio, 6.8; 95% CI, 0.9–54.5; p = .045). Diabetes (odds ratio, 28.6; 95% CI, 5.5–149.9; p = .004) was a risk factor for infection. Patient age, sex, BMI, and smoking status were not associated with risk of infection after rACLR.
Effect of High-Grade Preoperative Knee Laxity on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Outcomes
Magnussen, Robert A., Reinke, Emily K. , Huston, Laura J. , Group, MOON, Hewett, Timothy E. , Andrish, Jack T. , Jones, Morgan H. , Parker, Richard D., McCarty, Eric C. , Marx, Robert G. , Amendola, Annunziato , Wolf, Brian R. , Flanigan, David C. , Kaeding, Christopher C. , Brophy, Robert H. , Matava, Matthew J. , Wright, Rick W. , Dunn, Warren R. , Magnussen, Robert A. , Group, MOON, Spindler, Kurt P , Brophy, Robert H. , Jones, Morgan H , McCarty, Eric C

The American Journal of Sports Medicine | August 1, 2016 | Volume: 44 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 3077-3082

10.1177/0363546516656835 Get It

Background: Knee laxity in the setting of suspected anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is frequently assessed through physical examination using the Lachman, pivot-shift, and anterior drawer tests. The degree of laxity noted on these examinations may influence treatment decisions and prognosis. Hypothesis: Increased preoperative knee laxity would be associated with increased risk of subsequent revision ACL reconstruction and worse patient-reported outcomes 2 years postoperatively. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: From an ongoing prospective cohort study, 2333 patients who underwent primary isolated ACL reconstruction without collateral or posterior cruciate ligament injury were identified. Patients reported by the operating surgeons as having an International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) grade D for Lachman, anterior drawer, or pivot-shift examination were classified as having high-grade laxity. Multiple logistic regression modeling was used to evaluate whether having high-grade preoperative laxity was associated with increased odds of undergoing revision ACL reconstruction within 2 years of the index procedure, controlling for patient age, sex, Marx activity level, level of competition, and graft type. Multiple linear regression modeling was used to evaluate whether having high-grade preoperative laxity was associated with worse IKDC score or Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Knee-Related Quality of Life subscale (KOOS-QOL) scores at a minimum 2 years postoperatively, controlling for baseline score, patient age, ethnicity, sex, body mass index, marital status, smoking status, sport participation, competition level, Marx activity rating score, graft type, and articular cartilage and meniscus status. Results: Pre-reconstruction laxity data were available for 2325 patients (99.7%). Two-year revision data were available for 2259 patients (96.8%), and patient-reported outcomes were available for 1979 patients (84.8%). High-grade preoperative laxity was noted in 743 patients (31.9%). The mean postoperative IKDC score was 81.8 ± 15.9, and the mean KOOS-QOL score was 72.0 ± 22.0. The presence of high-grade pre-reconstruction laxity was associated with significantly increased odds of ACL graft revision (odds ratio [OR] = 1.87 [95% CI, 1.19-2.95]; P = .007). The presence of high-grade pre-reconstruction laxity was not associated with any difference in postoperative IKDC (β = −0.56, P = .44) or KOOS-QOL (β = 0.04, P = .97). Conclusion: The presence of high-grade pre-reconstruction knee laxity as assessed by manual physical examination under anesthesia is associated with significantly increased odds of revision ACL surgery but has no association with patient-reported outcome scores at 2 years after ACL reconstruction.