Two-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction reduces failure risk but leads to lesser clinical outcomes than single-stage revision after primary anterior cruciate ligament graft failure: a retrospective cohort study.

Anna M Ifarraguerri, George D Graham, Alexander B White, Alexander N Berk, Kennedy K Gachigi, Patrick N Siparsky, David P Trofa, Dana P Piasecki, James E Fleischli, Bryan M Saltzman
{"title":"Two-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction reduces failure risk but leads to lesser clinical outcomes than single-stage revision after primary anterior cruciate ligament graft failure: a retrospective cohort study.","authors":"Anna M Ifarraguerri, George D Graham, Alexander B White, Alexander N Berk, Kennedy K Gachigi, Patrick N Siparsky, David P Trofa, Dana P Piasecki, James E Fleischli, Bryan M Saltzman","doi":"10.1186/s43019-024-00257-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There are no studies that compare the outcomes and complications of single-versus two-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) after primary ACLR failure. This purpose of this study is to examine clinical and functional outcomes and complications associated with single and two-stage revision ACLR after primary ACLR failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients who underwent single or two-stage revision ACLR after primary ACLR failure between 2012 and 2021 with a minimum of a 2 year follow-up were included. Patients were excluded if they were not treated at our single academic institution, had inadequate follow-up, or had incomplete medical records. Revision intraoperative data, concomitant injuries, and complications were collected by chart review. Return to sport, numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Veteran Rands 12-item health survey (VR-12 scores) were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The final analysis included 176 patients. A total of 147 (83.5%) had a single-stage revision ACLR (87 male, 60 female), and 29 (16.5%) had a two-stage revision ACLR (13 male, 16 female). Two-stage revision ACLR was significantly associated with anterior knee pain [odds ratio (OR) 4.36; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5 to 12.65; P = 0.007] but with lower failure rates (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.9; P = 0.04). On multivariate analysis, a two-stage revision ACLR reduced the risk of graft failure by 85% (OR 0.15; 95% CI 0.02 to 1.17; P = 0.07). Two-stage revision ACLR was significantly associated with a lower KOOS pain score (OR -11.7; 95% CI -22.35 to -1.04; P = 0.031), KOOS symptoms score (OR -17.11; 95% CI -28.85 to -5.36; P = 0.004), KOOS Activities of Daily Living (ADL) score (OR -11.15; 95% CI -21.71 to -0.59; P = 0.039) and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) physical component score (OR -9.99; 95% CI -15.77 to -4.22; P = 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The clinical outcomes and subjective patient scores significantly differed between the single-stage and two-stage revision ACLR after primary ACLR failure. Patients with a two-stage revision ACLR had a significantly reduced risk of revision graft failure but higher rates of postoperative anterior knee pain, lower pain scores, and lesser knee functional scores than single-stage revision patients.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study; level of evidence, 3.</p>","PeriodicalId":36317,"journal":{"name":"Knee Surgery and Related Research","volume":"37 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11734444/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knee Surgery and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-024-00257-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There are no studies that compare the outcomes and complications of single-versus two-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) after primary ACLR failure. This purpose of this study is to examine clinical and functional outcomes and complications associated with single and two-stage revision ACLR after primary ACLR failure.

Methods: All patients who underwent single or two-stage revision ACLR after primary ACLR failure between 2012 and 2021 with a minimum of a 2 year follow-up were included. Patients were excluded if they were not treated at our single academic institution, had inadequate follow-up, or had incomplete medical records. Revision intraoperative data, concomitant injuries, and complications were collected by chart review. Return to sport, numerical pain rating scale (NPRS) score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Veteran Rands 12-item health survey (VR-12 scores) were collected.

Results: The final analysis included 176 patients. A total of 147 (83.5%) had a single-stage revision ACLR (87 male, 60 female), and 29 (16.5%) had a two-stage revision ACLR (13 male, 16 female). Two-stage revision ACLR was significantly associated with anterior knee pain [odds ratio (OR) 4.36; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.5 to 12.65; P = 0.007] but with lower failure rates (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.9; P = 0.04). On multivariate analysis, a two-stage revision ACLR reduced the risk of graft failure by 85% (OR 0.15; 95% CI 0.02 to 1.17; P = 0.07). Two-stage revision ACLR was significantly associated with a lower KOOS pain score (OR -11.7; 95% CI -22.35 to -1.04; P = 0.031), KOOS symptoms score (OR -17.11; 95% CI -28.85 to -5.36; P = 0.004), KOOS Activities of Daily Living (ADL) score (OR -11.15; 95% CI -21.71 to -0.59; P = 0.039) and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) physical component score (OR -9.99; 95% CI -15.77 to -4.22; P = 0.001).

Conclusions: The clinical outcomes and subjective patient scores significantly differed between the single-stage and two-stage revision ACLR after primary ACLR failure. Patients with a two-stage revision ACLR had a significantly reduced risk of revision graft failure but higher rates of postoperative anterior knee pain, lower pain scores, and lesser knee functional scores than single-stage revision patients.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study; level of evidence, 3.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一项回顾性队列研究:原发性前交叉韧带移植失败后,两期翻修前交叉韧带重建可降低失败风险,但其临床结果低于单期翻修。
背景:目前还没有研究比较原发性前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)失败后单期翻修与两期翻修的结果和并发症。本研究的目的是检查原发性ACLR失败后单期和两期翻修ACLR的临床和功能结果以及并发症。方法:纳入2012年至2021年期间所有在原发性ACLR失败后接受单期或两期ACLR翻修的患者,并进行至少2年的随访。如果患者没有在我们单一的学术机构接受治疗,随访不充分或医疗记录不完整,则将其排除在外。通过图表复习收集术中修正资料、伴随损伤和并发症。收集恢复运动、数值疼痛评定量表(NPRS)评分、膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分(oos)、退伍军人健康调查(VR-12)评分。结果:最终分析纳入176例患者。共有147例(83.5%)进行了单阶段ACLR翻修(男性87例,女性60例),29例(16.5%)进行了两阶段ACLR翻修(男性13例,女性16例)。两期ACLR翻修与前膝关节疼痛显著相关[优势比(OR) 4.36;95%置信区间(CI) 1.5 ~ 12.65;P = 0.007]但失败率较低(OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 ~ 0.9;p = 0.04)。在多变量分析中,两阶段ACLR改良降低了85%移植物失败的风险(OR 0.15;95% CI 0.02 ~ 1.17;p = 0.07)。两阶段改良ACLR与较低的KOOS疼痛评分显著相关(OR -11.7;95% CI -22.35 ~ -1.04;P = 0.031), kos症状评分(OR -17.11;95% CI -28.85 ~ -5.36;P = 0.004), kos日常生活活动(ADL)评分(OR -11.15;95% CI为-21.71 ~ -0.59;P = 0.039)和退伍军人RAND 12项健康调查(VR-12)身体成分评分(OR -9.99;95% CI -15.77 ~ -4.22;p = 0.001)。结论:原发性ACLR失败后,单期和两期改良ACLR的临床结局和患者主观评分有显著差异。与单期翻修患者相比,两期翻修ACLR患者的翻修移植物失败风险显著降低,但术后膝关节前侧疼痛发生率较高,疼痛评分较低,膝关节功能评分较低。研究设计:回顾性队列研究;证据水平,3。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊最新文献
Caliper verification and gap measurements of kinematic alignment total knee arthroplasty utilizing an imageless, accelerometer-based navigation system. Relationship between muscle activation and sagittal knee joint biomechanics in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome: a cross-sectional study. Correction: Pathologically altered articular cartilage attracts intense chondrocyte invasion into the extracellular matrix: in vitro pilot study. Two-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction reduces failure risk but leads to lesser clinical outcomes than single-stage revision after primary anterior cruciate ligament graft failure: a retrospective cohort study. Risk factors of recurrent periprosthetic joint infection of the knee after two-stage reimplantation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1