Anzeige
Erschienen in:
18.05.2017 | KNEE
Patient and surgical characteristics that affect revision risk in dynamic intraligamentary stabilization of the anterior cruciate ligament
Erschienen in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Ausgabe 4/2018
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhaltenAbstract
Purpose
Failure of dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) that requires revision surgery of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) has not been studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of revision ACL surgery, and the patient characteristics and surgery-related factors that are associated with an increased risk of ACL revision after DIS.
Methods
This study analysed a prospective, consecutively documented single-centre case series using standardized case report forms over a 2.5-year follow-up period. The primary endpoint was revision ACL surgery. We used Kaplan–Meier analysis to examine the revision-free survival time, and a multiple logistic regression model of potential risk factors including age, sex, BMI, smoking status, previous contralateral ACL injury, Tegner activity score, interval to surgery, rupture pattern, hardware removal, and postoperative side-to-side difference in knee laxity. Relative risk was calculated for subgroups of significant risk factors.
Results
In total, 381 patients (195 male) with a mean age of 33 ± 12 years were included in the analysis. The incidence of revision ACL surgery was 30/381 (7.9%). Younger age (p = 0.001), higher Tegner activity score (p = 0.003), and increased knee laxity (p = 0.015) were significantly associated with revision ACL surgery. The increased relative risk for patients who were less than 24 years old, participated in activities at a Tegner level >5 points, or had >2 mm of side-to-side difference in knee laxity was 1.6, 3.7, and 2.3, respectively.
Conclusion
Young age, high level of sport activity, and high knee laxity observed in follow-up examinations increased the likelihood for revision surgery after DIS. Patients undergoing DIS should be informed of their potentially increased risk for therapy failure and carefully monitored during recovery.
Level of evidence
Case series, Level IV.