scholarly journals Proprioception After Multiligament Knee Injury: Does Ligament Repair Lead to Better Proprioceptive Acuity Than Ligament Reconstruction?

Cureus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah L Burton ◽  
Jon R A. Phillips ◽  
Nitin P Badhe ◽  
Benjamin J Olliverre ◽  
Christopher G Moran
Keyword(s):  
Knee Injury ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Repair ◽  
Multiligament Knee Injury

Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction after Surgical Management of Multiligament Knee Injury

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Worley ◽  
Olubusola Brimmo ◽  
Clayton W. Nuelle ◽  
Bradford P. Zitsch ◽  
Emily V. Leary ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Knee Injury ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Multiligament Knee Injury ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

AbstractThe purpose of this study is to determine factors associated with the need for revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) after multiligament knee injury (MLKI) and to report outcomes for patients undergoing revision ACLR after MLKI. This involves a retrospective review of 231 MLKIs in 225 patients treated over a 12-year period, with institutional review board approval. Patients with two or more injured knee ligaments requiring surgical reconstruction, including the ACL, were included for analyses. Overall, 231 knees with MLKIs underwent ACLR, with 10% (n = 24) requiring revision ACLR. There were no significant differences in age, sex, tobacco use, diabetes, or body mass index between cohorts requiring or not requiring revision ACLR. However, patients requiring revision ACLR had significantly longer follow-up duration (55.1 vs. 37.4 months, p = 0.004), more ligament reconstructions/repairs (mean 3.0 vs. 1.7, p < 0.001), more nonligament surgeries (mean 2.2 vs. 0.7, p = 0.002), more total surgeries (mean 5.3 vs. 2.4, p < 0.001), and more graft reconstructions (mean 4.7 vs. 2.7, p < 0.001). Patients in both groups had similar return to work (p = 0.12) and activity (p = 0.91) levels at final follow-up. Patients who had revision ACLR took significantly longer to return to work at their highest level (18 vs. 12 months, p = 0.036), but similar time to return to their highest level of activity (p = 0.33). Range of motion (134 vs. 127 degrees, p = 0.14), pain severity (2.2 vs. 1.7, p = 0.24), and Lysholm's scores (86.3 vs. 90.0, p = 0.24) at final follow-up were similar between groups. Patients requiring revision ACLR in the setting of a MLKI had more overall concurrent surgeries and other ligament reconstructions, but had similar final outcome scores to those who did not require revision surgery. Revision ligament surgery can be associated with increased pain, stiffness, and decrease patient outcomes. Revision surgery is often necessary after multiligament knee reconstructions, but patients requiring ACLR in the setting of a MLKI have good overall outcomes, with patients requiring revision ACLR at a rate of 10%.

Long-term clinical and radiological outcomes after multiligament knee injury using a delayed ligament reconstruction approach: A single-center experience

The Knee ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 1271-1277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Hantes ◽  
Apostolos Fyllos ◽  
Fotios Papageorgiou ◽  
Konstantinos Alexiou ◽  
Ioannis Antoniou
Keyword(s):  
Knee Injury ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Single Center Experience ◽  
Multiligament Knee Injury

scholarly journals Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. e23-e29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Romain Delaloye ◽  
Jozef Murar ◽  
Thais Dutra Vieira ◽  
Adnan Saithna ◽  
Johannes Barth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterolateral Ligament ◽  
Ligament Repair ◽  
Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in the Multiple Ligament Injured Knee

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (05) ◽  
pp. 421-430
Author(s):  
Michelle E. Kew ◽  
Mark D. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Posterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Knee Injury ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Knee Injuries ◽  
Surgical Reconstruction ◽  
Nonsurgical Management ◽  
Injured Knee ◽  
Tibial Inlay ◽  
Low Activity

AbstractMultiligamentous knee injuries are challenging to treat and diagnose. Posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injuries are commonly found in the constellation of injuries included in a multiligamentous knee injury and are caused by a posteriorly directed force on the proximal tibia with relation to the femoral condyles. A thorough history and physical examination should be performed to evaluate for associated neurovascular injuries and associated ligamentous, chondral, or bony injuries. Nonsurgical management is reserved for patients who are critically ill or have very low activity demands. Surgical reconstruction is recommended for most patients with multiligamentous knee injuries. The PCL reconstruction can be undertaken with several different graft options and reconstruction techniques, including the transtibial, arthroscopic tibial inlay, and open tibial inlay approach. The literature has a paucity of data regarding outcomes among the various reconstructive options, so the optimal surgical technique has not been established.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document