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
. 2022 Apr 15;12(2):35-44.
eCollection 2022.

Single-stage versus two-stage reconstruction in chronic multi ligament knee injury

Mohammad Jesan Khan  1 , Naiyer Asif  1 , Anubhav Sharma  1 , Yasir Salam Siddiqui  1 , Abdul Qayyum Khan  1
Affiliations

Single-stage versus two-stage reconstruction in chronic multi ligament knee injury

Mohammad Jesan Khan et al. Int J Burns Trauma. .

Abstract

Background: Multi ligament knee injury (MLKI) refers to the disruption of at least 2 of the 4 major knee ligaments. These injuries are managed in single and two-stage surgeries however, treatment guidelines for best practice are unsettled. There is no study in the literature that compares single and two-stage surgery for the management of chronic multiligament knee injury. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the functional outcome between single-stage and two-stage surgical fixation in chronic multi-ligament knee injury.

Methods: Twenty seven patients with chronic MLKI with at least 2 years of follow up were included. Fourteen patients underwent reconstruction of torn ligaments in a single-stage operation (Group I) and 13 patients underwent reconstruction of torn ligaments in two stages (Group II). Assessment of clinical outcome was done with IKDC knee score, TEGNER LYSHOLM knee score, range of movement and laxity tests (Anterior drawer test, Lachman, Posterior drawer test, pivot shift test, dial test, varus and valgus stress test).

Results: At final follow up, there was no significant difference in post-operative IKDC knee scores in group I and group II (84.7±7.1 and 81.4±8.4 respectively, p=0.3) and Lysholm scores (85.8±8.3 and 80.9±8.3 respectively, p=0.1), range of movement (133.2±5.7 and 131.5±6.6 respectively, p=0.5) and all the patients regained full extension. At the final follow up 12/14 patients (85.7%) in group I and 11/13 patients (84.6%) in group II had a negative/grade 1 anterior drawer test (p=0.6), 14/14 (100%) in group I and 13/13 (100%) patients had negative/grade 1 lachman test (p=0.6), 13/14 patients (92.8%) in group I and 13/13 patients (100%) patients in group II had negative/grade 1 pivot shift test (p=0.4), 9/10 patients (90%) in group I and 12/13 patients (92.3%) in group II had negative/grade 1 posterior drawer (p=0.6), 6/6 patients (100%) in group I and 6/7 patients (85.7%) in group II had negative/grade 1 dial test (p=0.3), 5/6 patients (83.3%) in group I and 5/7 patients (71.4%) in group II had negative/grade 1 varus stress test (p=0.4), 6/7 patients (85.7%) in group I and 7/7 patients (100%) in group II had negative/grade 1 valgus stress test (p=0.1).

Conclusion: Chronic MLKI managed by single stage and two stage reconstruction provides similar functional outcomes.

Level of evidence: Level III Retrospective Cohort Study.

Keywords: Multi ligament knee injury; single-stage; two-stage.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
It shows anterior translation of tibia (A), posterior translation of tibia (B), lateral opening of joint line on varus stress test (C), PCL and LCL reconstruction in one stage (D) and ACL reconstruction at second stage (E) in KDIV injury.
Figure 2
Figure 2
It shows preoperative radiograph of KDIIIL injury (A) and ACL, PCL and LCL reconstruction in single stage (B).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bagherifard A, Jabalameli M, Ghaffari S, Rezazadeh J, Abedi M, Mirkazemi M, Aghamohamadi J, Hesabi A, Mohammadpour M. Short to mid-term outcomes of single-stage reconstruction of multiligament knee injury. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2019;7:346–353. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Liow RY, McNicholas MJ, Keating JF, Nutton RW. Ligament repair and reconstruction in traumatic dislocation of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003;85:845–51. - PubMed
    1. Wascher DC, Becker JR, Dexter JG, Blevins FT. Reconstruction of the anterior and posterior cruciate ligaments after knee dislocation. Results using fresh-frozen nonirradiated allografts. Am J Sports Med. 1999;27:189–96. - PubMed
    1. Fanelli GC, Giannotti BF, Edson CJ. Arthroscopically assisted combined anterior and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 1996;12:5–14. - PubMed
    1. Fanelli GC, Orcutt DR, Edson CJ. The multiple-ligament injured knee: evaluation, treatment, and results. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:471–86. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources