Does ACL reconstruction alter natural history?: A systematic literature review of long-term outcomes
- PMID: 24553885
- DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.L.01713
Does ACL reconstruction alter natural history?: A systematic literature review of long-term outcomes
Abstract
Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury can lead to tibiofemoral instability, decreased functional outcomes, and degenerative joint disease. It is unknown whether ACL reconstruction alters this progression at long-term follow-up.
Methods: A systematic literature review of the long-term results (minimum follow-up, more than ten years) after operative intra-articular reconstruction of ACL injuries and after nonoperative management was performed to compare (1) knee stability on physical examination, (2) functional and patient-based outcomes, (3) the need for further surgical intervention, and (4) radiographic outcomes. After application of selection criteria, forty patient cohorts with a mean of 13.9 ± 3.1 years of postoperative follow-up were identified. Twenty-seven cohorts containing 1585 patients had undergone reconstruction, and thirteen containing 685 patients had been treated nonoperatively.
Results: Comparison of operative and nonoperative cohorts revealed no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, or rate of initial meniscal injury (p > 0.05 for all). Operative cohorts had significantly less need for further surgery (12.4% compared with 24.9% for nonoperative, p = 0.0176), less need for subsequent meniscal surgery (13.9% compared with 29.4%, p = 0.0017), and less decline in the Tegner score (-1.9 compared with -3.1, p = 0.0215). A difference in pivot-shift test results was observed (25.5% pivot-positive compared with 46.6% for nonoperative) but did not reach significance (p = 0.09). No significant differences were seen in outcome scores (Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], or final Tegner scores) or the rate of radiographically evident degenerative joint disease (p > 0.05 for all).
Conclusions: At a mean of 13.9 ± 3.1 years after injury, the patients who underwent ACL reconstruction had fewer subsequent meniscal injuries, less need for further surgery, and significantly greater improvement in activity level as measured with the Tegner score. There were no significant differences in the Lysholm score, IKDC score, or development of radiographically evident osteoarthritis.
Similar articles
-
Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 3;4(4):CD011166. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011166.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016. PMID: 27039329 Free PMC article.
-
The Importance of Patient Sex in the Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Am J Sports Med. 2016 Jan;44(1):242-54. doi: 10.1177/0363546515573008. Epub 2015 Mar 23. Am J Sports Med. 2016. PMID: 25802119
-
Bioabsorbable versus metallic interference screws for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jul 24;7(7):CD009772. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009772.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016. PMID: 27450741 Free PMC article.
-
Double-bundle versus single-bundle reconstruction for anterior cruciate ligament rupture in adults.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Nov 14;11(11):CD008413. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008413.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012. PMID: 23152258 Free PMC article.
-
Computer-assisted surgery for knee ligament reconstruction.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Sep 3;2014(9):CD007601. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007601.pub4. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014. PMID: 25180899 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Arthroscopic primary repair of proximal anterior cruciate ligament tears: outcomes of the first 56 consecutive patients and the role of additional internal bracing.Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019 Jan;27(1):21-28. doi: 10.1007/s00167-018-5338-z. Epub 2019 Jan 5. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019. PMID: 30612165
-
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Research Retreat VIII Summary Statement: An Update on Injury Risk Identification and Prevention Across the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Continuum, March 14-16, 2019, Greensboro, NC.J Athl Train. 2019 Sep;54(9):970-984. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-54.084. Epub 2019 Aug 28. J Athl Train. 2019. PMID: 31461312 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Optimal Graft Choice in Athletic Patients with Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries: Review and Clinical Insights.Open Access J Sports Med. 2022 Jul 1;13:55-67. doi: 10.2147/OAJSM.S340702. eCollection 2022. Open Access J Sports Med. 2022. PMID: 35800660 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparison of artificial graft versus autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Jul 19;18(1):309. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1672-4. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017. PMID: 28724372 Free PMC article.
-
Primary surgery versus primary rehabilitation for treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries: a living systematic review and meta-analysis.Br J Sports Med. 2022 Nov;56(21):1241-1251. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2021-105359. Epub 2022 Aug 29. Br J Sports Med. 2022. PMID: 36038357 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical