Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Oct 24;5(10):2325967117731767.
doi: 10.1177/2325967117731767. eCollection 2017 Oct.

The Role of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis and Best-Evidence Synthesis

Brian M Devitt  1   2 , Stuart W Bell  1 , Clare L Ardern  3 , Taylor Hartwig  1 , Tabitha J Porter  1 , Julian A Feller  1 , Kate E Webster  2
Affiliations

The Role of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis and Best-Evidence Synthesis

Brian M Devitt et al. Orthop J Sports Med. .

Abstract

Background: The role of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LEAT) to augment primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains controversial.

Purpose: To determine whether the addition of LEAT to primary ACLR provides greater control of rotational laxity and improves clinical outcomes compared with ACLR alone and to assess the impact of early versus delayed ACLR.

Study design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods: Two reviewers independently searched 7 databases for randomized and nonrandomized clinical studies comparing ACLR plus LEAT versus ACLR alone. Animal, cadaveric, and biomechanical studies; revision or repair procedures; and studies using synthetic ligaments and multiligamentous-injured knees were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed with a modified Downs and Black checklist. The primary outcome was postoperative pivot shift. These data were pooled by use of a fixed-effects meta-analysis model. The studies were divided into delayed (>12 months) and early (≤12 months) reconstruction groups for meta-analysis. A best-evidence synthesis was performed on the remaining outcome measures.

Results: Of 387 titles identified, 11 articles were included (5 of high quality). Meta-analysis of postoperative pivot shift in 3 studies of delayed primary ACLR showed a statistically significant difference for the pivot-shift test in favor of ACLR with LEAT (odds ratio [OR], 0.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-0.81; P = .008; I2 = 0). Meta-analysis of 5 studies of early primary ACLR found no statistically significant difference with the addition of LEAT (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.33-1.09; P = .10; I2 = 33%). Insufficient evidence was available to determine whether the addition of LEAT had any effect on clinical, objective, subjective, and functional outcomes.

Conclusion: In primary ACLR, no evidence is available showing additional benefit of LEAT in reducing the postoperative pivot shift in early reconstructions (≤12 months); however, LEAT may have a role in delayed ACLR. Strong evidence exists that a combined ACLR and LEAT reduces lateral femoral translation, but there is insufficient evidence to identify any benefit for other clinical outcomes.

Keywords: lateral extra-articular tenodesis; pivot shift; primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; surgical timing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest in the authorship and publication of this contribution.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) flow diagram. ACL, anterior cruciate ligament; ACLR, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; LEAT, lateral extra-articular tenodesis; N/A, not applicable.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Meta-analysis using fixed-effects model to compare the pivot-shift test of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LEAT) versus ACLR alone for all studies. M-H = Mantel-Haenszel test.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Meta-analysis using fixed-effects model to compare the pivot-shift test of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LEAT) versus ACLR alone for early reconstruction (≤12 months from injury). M-H = Mantel-Haenszel test.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Meta-analysis using fixed-effects model to compare the pivot-shift test of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LEAT) versus ACLR alone for delayed reconstruction (>12 months from injury). M-H = Mantel-Haenszel test.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Amis AA, Scammell BE. Biomechanics of intra-articular and extra-articular reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993;75(5):812–817. - PubMed
    1. Anderson AF, Snyder RB, Lipscomb AB., Jr Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective randomized study of three surgical methods. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29(3):272–279. - PubMed
    1. Barber-Westin SD, Noyes FR. The effect of rehabilitation and return to activity on anterior-posterior knee displacements after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 1993;21(2):264–270. - PubMed
    1. Barrett GR, Richardson KJ. The effect of added extra-articular procedure on results of ACL reconstruction. Am J Knee Surg. 1995;8(1):1–6. - PubMed
    1. Branch T, Lavoie F, Guier C, et al. Single-bundle ACL reconstruction with and without extra-articular reconstruction: evaluation with robotic lower leg rotation testing and patient satisfaction scores. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23(10):2882–2891. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources