The Incidence of Post-Traumatic Osteoarthritis on Clinical Radiographs at 10 Years after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Data from the MOON Nested Cohort (168)

Objectives: 1) To prospectively determine the incidence of post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) at 10 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in young athletic patients on clinical radiographs: and 2) to determine the average difference in clinical radiographic osteoarthritis changes (joint space narrowing [JSN] and osteophyte formation) between the ACLR and contralateral ACL-intact knees. Methods: The first 146 patients in an ongoing prospective nested cohort study within the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) cohort returned onsite for minimum 10-year follow-up. Inclusion criteria were that patients had a sports-related ACL injury, no prior history of knee surgery, no contralateral ACL injury, and were less than 33 years of age at the time of their ACLR. Bilateral knee standing metatarsophalangeal (MTP) view radiographs were obtained and graded by International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI), and modified Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) criteria by two blinded reviewers. Inter-rater reliability was determined for all clinical radiographic OA grading criteria. The incidence and severity of ipsilateral and contralateral knee osteoarthritis were determined among patients without a contralateral ACL injury before 10-year follow-up (n=133). Results: Inter-rater reliability was substantial for IKDC (Gwet’s AC1 = 0.71), moderate for KL (0.48) and almost perfect for OARSI (0.84) grading systems. The 10-year incidence of PTOA on clinical radiographs in the ACLR knee was 43% as defined by osteophytes and 27% as defined by JSN (Table 1). In the contralateral ACL-intact knee, the incidence of osteophyte-defined OA was 10% and JSN-defined OA was 5%. The maximum side-to side difference in medial or lateral compartment OARSI osteophyte grade was 0 in 65% of patients, 1 in 20%, and 2+ in 15% (Figure 1) (Table 2). The maximum difference in OARSI JSN grade was 0 in 77% of patients, 1 in 19%, and 2+ in 4% (Figure 2) (Table 2). Conclusions: In young active patients, the 10-year incidence on clinical radiographs of osteophyte-defined PTOA after ACLR is 43% and JSN-defined PTOA is 27%. The average difference in degree of osteophyte formation (≤1 grade in 85%) and JSN (≤1 grade in 96%) between the ACLR knee and contralateral ACL-intact knee is small.

Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Alters Lateral Compartment Contact Mechanics under Simulated Pivoting Maneuvers: An In Vitro Study

Background: There is concern that utilization of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) may disturb lateral compartment contact mechanics and contribute to joint degeneration. Hypothesis: ACLR augmented with LET will alter lateral compartment contact mechanics in response to simulated pivoting maneuvers. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Loads simulating a pivot shift were applied to 7 cadaveric knees (4 male; mean age, 39 ± 12 years; range, 28-54 years) using a robotic manipulator. Each knee was tested with the ACL intact, sectioned, reconstructed (via patellar tendon autograft), and, finally, after augmenting ACLR with LET (using a modified Lemaire technique) in the presence of a sectioned anterolateral ligament and Kaplan fibers. Lateral compartment contact mechanics were measured using a contact stress transducer. Outcome measures were anteroposterior location of the center of contact stress (CCS), contact force from anterior to posterior, and peak and mean contact stress. Results: On average, augmenting ACLR with LET shifted the lateral compartment CCS anteriorly compared with the intact knee and compared with ACLR in isolation by a maximum of 5.4 ± 2.3 mm ( P < .001) and 6.0 ± 2.6 mm ( P < .001), respectively. ACLR augmented with LET also increased contact force anteriorly on the lateral tibial plateau compared with the intact knee and compared with isolated ACLR by a maximum of 12 ± 6 N ( P = .001) and 17 ± 10 N ( P = .002), respectively. Compared with ACLR in isolation, ACLR augmented with LET increased peak and mean lateral compartment contact stress by 0.7 ± 0.5 MPa ( P = .005) and by 0.17 ± 0.12 ( P = .006), respectively, at 15° of flexion. Conclusion: Under simulated pivoting loads, adding LET to ACLR anteriorized the CCS on the lateral tibial plateau, thereby increasing contact force anteriorly. Compared with ACLR in isolation, ACLR augmented with LET increased peak and mean lateral compartment contact stress at 15° of flexion. Clinical Relevance: The clinical and biological effect of increased anterior loading of the lateral compartment after LET merits further investigation. The ability of LET to anteriorize contact stress on the lateral compartment may be useful in knees with passive anterior subluxation of the lateral tibia.

Numerical Investigation of the Effects of Bucket Handle Tears and Subtotal Medial Meniscectomies on the Biomechanical Response of Human Knee Joints

Understanding the complex biomechanical behaviour of the injured and meniscectomised knee joints is of utmost significance in various clinical circumstances. The objective of this study is to investigate the effects of bucket handle tears in the medial meniscus and subtotal medial meniscectomies on the biomechanical response of the knee joints belonging to multiple subjects. The three-dimensional (3D) finite element models of human knee joints including bones, cartilages, menisci, ligaments and tendons are developed from magnetic resonance images (MRI) of multiple healthy subjects. The knee joints are subjected to an axial compressive force, which corresponds to the force of the gait cycle for the full extension position of the knee joint. Three different conditions are compared: intact knee joints, knee joints with bucket handle tears in the medial meniscus and knee joints after subtotal meniscectomies. The bucket handle tear causes a considerable rise in the maximum principal stress at its tip compared to that at the same location in the intact meniscus. This would cause the total rupture of the meniscus resulting in cartilage damage. Subtotal meniscectomy causes a considerable reduction in the contact area along with a substantial increase in the contact pressure and maximum compressive stress in the cartilages in comparison with that in the intact knee. This could give rise to severe degenerative changes in the cartilage. The results of this study could help surgeons in making clinical decisions when managing patients with meniscal injuries.

Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for meniscal body tear in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees compared to anterior cruciate ligament-intact knee

Objectives: This prospective case–control study was conducted with primary aim to compare the value of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for the detection of meniscal tear in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-deficient and ACL-intact groups. The secondary aim was to identify if the sensitivity and accuracy differ if the MRI is older than 3 months from the time of surgery. Materials and Methods: There were 255 patients enrolled into this study out of which 207 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Among 207, 138 underwent surgery within 1 month of MRI, 30 had 1–3 months delay, and 39 cases underwent surgery more than 3 months after their MRI. Among 167 patients who underwent surgery within 3 months of MRI, 97 had ACL tear and 71 had intact ACL. Results: The overall sensitivity for lateral meniscus tear (68.2%) is significantly lower than the medial meniscus tear (92.9%). The sensitivity of MRI for medial meniscus tear in ACL-deficient knee is lower than ACL-intact knees (90% vs. 96.2%, P = 0.3). Similarly, the sensitivity is significantly lesser for lateral meniscus tear in ACL-deficient knee compared to ACL-intact knee (50% vs. 83.3%, P = 0.009). The sensitivity of MRI for both the lateral and medial meniscus tear decreased if the MRI performed 3 months before the surgery. Conclusion: Patients with ACL-deficient knee have to be counseled for intraoperative detection of lateral meniscus tear as the sensitivity of MRI for lateral meniscus tear in ACL-deficient group is low. Similarly, if the MRI is more than 3 months old from the time of surgery, we recommend to repeat the MRI as the sensitivity decreases significantly.

Different anterolateral procedures have variable impact on knee kinematics and stability when performed in combination with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

ObjectiveThe optimal anterolateral procedure to control anterolateral rotational laxity of the knee is still unknown. The objective was to compare the ability of five anterolateral procedures performed in combination with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) to restore native knee kinematics in the setting of a deficient anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and anterolateral structures.MethodsA controlled laboratory study was performed using 10 fresh-frozen cadaveric whole lower limbs with intact iliotibial band. Kinematics from 0° to 90° of flexion were recorded using a motion analysis three-dimensional (3D) optoelectronic system, allowing assessment of internal rotation (IR) and anteroposterior (AP) tibial translation at 30° and 90° of flexion. Joint centres and bony landmarks were calculated from 3D bone models obtained from CT scans. Intact knee kinematics were assessed initially, followed by sequential section of the ACL and anterolateral structures (anterolateral ligament, anterolateral capsule and Kaplan fibres). After ACLR, five anterolateral procedures were performed consecutively on the same knee: ALLR, modified Ellison, deep Lemaire, superficial Lemaire and modified MacIntosh. The last three procedures were randomised. For each procedure, the graft was fixed in neutral rotation at 30° of flexion and with a tension of 20 N.ResultsIsolated ACLR did not restore normal overall knee kinematics in a combined ACL plus anterolateral-deficient knee, leaving a residual tibial rotational laxity (p=0.034). Only the ALLR (p=0.661) and modified Ellison procedure (p=0.641) restored overall IR kinematics to the normal intact state. Superficial and deep Lemaire and modified MacIntosh tenodeses overconstrained IR, leading to shifted and different kinematics compared with the intact condition (p=0.004, p=0.001 and p=0.045, respectively). Compared with ACLR state, addition of an anterolateral procedure did not induce any additional control on AP translation at 30° and 90° of flexion (all p>0.05), except for the superficial Lemaire procedure at 90° (p=0.032).ConclusionIn biomechanical in vitro setting, a comparison of five anterolateral procedures revealed that addition of either ALLR or modified Ellison procedure restored overall native knee kinematics in a combined ACL plus anterolateral-deficient knee. Superficial and deep Lemaire and modified MacIntosh tenodeses achieved excellent rotational control but overconstrained IR, leading to a change from intact knee kinematics.Level of evidenceThe level-of-evidence statement does not apply for this laboratory experiments study.

Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis Reduces Anterior Cruciate Ligament Graft Force and Anterior Tibial Translation in Response to Applied Pivoting and Anterior Drawer Loads

Background: The biomechanical effect of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) performed in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) on load sharing between the ACL graft and the LET and on knee kinematics is not clear. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to quantify the effect of LET on (1) forces carried by both the ACL graft and the LET and (2) tibiofemoral kinematics in response to simulated pivot shift and anterior laxity tests. We hypothesized that LET would decrease forces carried by the ACL graft and anterior tibial translation (ATT) in response to simulated pivoting maneuvers and during simulated tests of anterior laxity. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Seven cadaveric knees (mean age, 39 ± 12 years [range, 28-54 years]; 4 male) were mounted to a robotic manipulator. The robot simulated clinical pivoting maneuvers and tests of anterior laxity: namely, the Lachman and anterior drawer tests. Each knee was assessed in the following states: ACL intact, ACL sectioned, ACL reconstructed (using a bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft), and after performing LET (the modified Lemaire technique after sectioning of the anterolateral ligament and Kaplan fibers). Resultant forces carried by the ACL graft and LET at the peak applied loads were determined via superposition. ATT was determined in response to the applied loads. Results: With the applied pivoting loads, performing LET decreased ACL graft force up to 80% (44 ± 12 N; P < .001) and decreased ATT of the lateral compartment compared with that of the intact knee up to 7.6 ± 2.9 mm ( P < .001). The LET carried up to 91% of the force generated in the ACL graft during isolated ACLR (without LET). For simulated tests of anterior laxity, performing LET decreased ACL graft force by 70% (40 ± 20 N; P = .001) for the anterior drawer test with no significant difference detected for the Lachman test. No differences in ATT were deteced between ACLR with LET and the intact knee on both the Lachman and the anterior drawer tests ( P = .409). LET reduced ATT compared with isolated ACLR on the simulated anterior drawer test by 2.4 ± 1.8 mm ( P = .032) but not on the simulated Lachman test. Conclusion: In a cadaveric model, LET in combination with ACLR transferred loads from the ACL graft to the LET and reduced ATT with applied pivoting loads and during the simulated anterior drawer test. The effect of LET on ACL graft force and ATT was less pronounced on the simulated Lachman test. Clinical Relevance: LET in addition to ACLR may be a suitable option to offload the ACL graft and to reduce ATT in the lateral compartment to magnitudes less than that of the intact knee with clinical pivoting maneuvers. In contrast, LET did not offload the ACL graft or add to the anterior restraint provided by the ACL graft during the Lachman test.

Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Reduces ACL Graft Force Under Multiplanar Torques Simulationg Pivot Shit

Objectives: Utilization of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has increased in recent years, however, the biomechanical impact of LET, when performed with contemporary techniques, on both load sharing between the ACL graft and the LET and on knee kinematics is not completely clear. The purpose of this study was to quantify the effect of LET performed with ACLR, in the presence of a compromised anterolateral tissues, on (1) forces carried by the ACL graft and the LET and (2) knee kinematics, during simulated pivot shift. Methods: manipulator equipped with a six-axis force-torque sensor. The robot applied multiplanar torques simulating two types of pivot shift (PS) subluxing the lateral compartment at 15° and 30° of knee flexion. The following loading combinations were applied: (PS1) 8 Nm of valgus and 4 Nm of internal rotation torques; (PS2) 100 N compression force, 8 Nm valgus torque, 2 Nm internal rotation torque, and 30 N anterior force. Anteroposterior (AP) translation in the lateral compartment of the knee was recorded in the following states: ACL intact, sectioned, reconstructed and, finally, after sectioning the anterolateral ligament (ALL) and kaplan fibers and performing a LET. ACLR was performed utilizing a bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft, via medial parapatellar arthrotomy. LET was performed using a modified lemaire technique with a metal staple femoral fixation at 60° of flexion in neutral rotation. Resultant forces carried by the ACL graft and LET at the peak applied load in all tested conditions were determined utilizing the principle of superposition and serial sectioning. Results: Under both simulated pivot shift types and at both flexion angles the ACL force decreased with the addition of a LET, with the least force reduction of 39% for PS2 at 15° (p=0.01) and the most force reduction of 80% for PS1 at 30° (p<0.001). While decreasing ACL force, the LET carried at least 43% of the force carried by the ACL graft when tested without LET for PS2 at 15° and 91% of the force carried by the ACL graft at most, for PS1 at 30° (Table 1). For both combinations of multiplananr torques and at both flexion angles, the anterior tibial translation in the lateral compartment decreased for the ACLR+LET knee compared to the intact knee (5.3mm and 7.6mm decrease, for PS1 15° and 30° respectively, p<0.001; 4.4mm p=0.005 and 7.6mm p<0.001, for PS2 15° and 30°, respectively). (Figure 2). Conclusion: During a simulated pivot shift, LET shields the ACL graft from loading. This effect was greatest at 30° of flexion with an 80% drop in ACL graft force. While some shielding of load from the ACL graft can be beneficial, a more significant reduction in the load of the ACL graft may potentially be detrimental to the graft remodeling, maturation and function. The optimal load sharing pattern for improved clinical outcomes is not well understood and merit further investigation. In addition, LET also decreases anterior tibial translation in the lateral compartment to less than that of the intact knee, which represents overconstraint of the lateral compartment. These findings may support the purported “protective” effect of LET on the ACL graft and its important role in stabilizing the lateral compartment in the setting of combined ACL and anterolateral structures deficiency. The influence of overconstraint of the lateral compartment with LET warrants further biomechanical and clinical evaluation. [Table: see text][Figure: see text][Figure: see text]

The medial ligaments and the ACL restrain anteromedial laxity of the knee

Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the contribution of each of the ACL and medial ligament structures in resisting anteromedial rotatory instability (AMRI) loads applied in vitro. Methods Twelve knees were tested using a robotic system. It imposed loads simulating clinical laxity tests at 0° to 90° flexion: ±90 N anterior–posterior force, ±8 Nm varus–valgus moment, and ±5 Nm internal–external rotation, and the tibial displacements were measured in the intact knee. The ACL and individual medial structures—retinaculum, superficial and deep medial collateral ligament (sMCL and dMCL), and posteromedial capsule with oblique ligament (POL + PMC)—were sectioned sequentially. The tibial displacements were reapplied after each cut and the reduced loads required allowed the contribution of each structure to be calculated. Results For anterior translation, the ACL was the primary restraint, resisting 63–77% of the drawer force across 0° to 90°, the sMCL contributing 4–7%. For posterior translation, the POL + PMC contributed 10% of the restraint in extension; other structures were not significant. For valgus load, the sMCL was the primary restraint (40–54%) across 0° to 90°, the dMCL 12%, and POL + PMC 16% in extension. For external rotation, the dMCL resisted 23–13% across 0° to 90°, the sMCL 13–22%, and the ACL 6–9%. Conclusion The dMCL is the largest medial restraint to tibial external rotation in extension. Therefore, following a combined ACL + MCL injury, AMRI may persist if there is inadequate healing of both the sMCL and dMCL, and MCL deficiency increases the risk of ACL graft failure.