Multiple revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: not the best but still good

Abstract

Purpose: Given the paucity of literature on the re-revision of ACL, the current study was undertaken. The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesise and qualitatively assess the currently available evidence in the literature regarding the re-revision of ACL reconstruction (rrACLR).

Methods: A systematic review was conducted based on the PRISMA guidelines. The following search terms were used in the title, abstract and keywords fields: "ACL" or "anterior cruciate ligament" AND "revision" or "multiple" or "repeat". The outcome data extracted from the studies were the Lysholm score, Subjective IKDC, Marx Score, Tegner, Marx Score, KOOS score, radiological changes and the rate of return to sports. Complications, failures and/or revision surgery were also analysed.

Results: The cohort consisted of 295 patients [191 (64.7%) men and 104 (35.3%) women] with a mean age of 29.9 ± 2.8 years (range 14-58 years) from 10 studies. The mean postoperative follow-up (reported in all studies except one) was 66.9 ± 44.7 months (range 13-230.4 months). Associated injuries were 103 (34.9%) medial meniscus tears, 57 (19.3%) lateral meniscus tears, 14 (4.7%) combined medial plus lateral meniscus tears, 11 (3.7%) meniscal tears (not specified), 252 (85.4%) cartilage lesions, 6 (2.0%) medial collateral ligament injury and 2 (0.7%) lateral collateral ligament injuries. In 47 (15.9%) patients an extra-articular plasty was performed for the anterolateral ligament. In all studies that reported pre- and post-operative IKDC (subjective and objective) and Lysholm score, there was a significant improvement compared to the pre-operative value (p < 0.05). At the final follow-up, laxity measured with KT-1000 was found to be 2.2 ± 0.6 mm. 31 (10.5%) out of 295 patients returned to their pre-injury activity level. A total of 19 (6.4%) re-ruptures were found, while only 4 (1.4%) complications (all minors) were reported, out of which 2 (0.7%) were superficial infections, 1 (0.3%) cyclops lesion and 1 (0.3%) flexion loss.

Conclusion: Multiple revisions of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction allow acceptable clinical results and a good degree of knee stability with a low rate of subsequent new re-ruptures but the possibility of regaining pre-injury sports activity is poor; whenever possible, it is preferred to revise the ligament in one stage. This surgery remains a challenge for orthopaedic surgeons and many doubts persist regarding the ideal grafts, additional extra-articular procedures and techniques to use.

Level of evidence: IV.

Study registration: PROSPERO-CRD42022352164 ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ ).

Keywords: A systematic review; Anterior cruciate ligament; Injury; Multiple; Re-revision; Revision.

Fig. 1

A flowchart of the literature screening performed in this study

Fig. 2

Pre-operative anteroposterior and lateral X-ray of a re-revision surgery case; left knee. The widened and increased tibial tunnel and probable mobilisation of the femoral plateau are visible

Fig. 3

Pre-operative axial CT-Scan (on the left) and MRI (on the right) of a re-revision surgery case showing an enlargement of the previous tibial tunnel

Fig. 4

Pre-operative sagittal CT-Scan (on the left) and MRI (on the right) of a re-revision surgery case showing enlargement of the previous tibial tunnel

Fig. 5

Pre-operative sagittal CT-Scan (on the left) and MRI (on the right) of a re-revision surgery case showing bone resorption on the femoral neo-ACL insertion