Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Lateral Extra-Articular Procedures: A Systematic Review.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Medicina-Lithuania Pub Date : 2025-02-08 DOI:10.3390/medicina61020294
Filippo Migliorini, Ludovico Lucenti, Ying Ren Mok, Tommaso Bardazzi, Riccardo D'Ambrosi, Angelo De Carli, Domenico Paolicelli, Nicola Maffulli
{"title":"Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Lateral Extra-Articular Procedures: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Filippo Migliorini, Ludovico Lucenti, Ying Ren Mok, Tommaso Bardazzi, Riccardo D'Ambrosi, Angelo De Carli, Domenico Paolicelli, Nicola Maffulli","doi":"10.3390/medicina61020294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background and Objectives</i>: The present systematic review investigated the efficacy of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and anterolateral ligament (ALL) as lateral extra-articular procedures (LEAPs) for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. ACL reconstruction using LEAP may reduce graft rupture and rotatory laxity and allow a quicker return to sports. The outcomes of interest were patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), return to sport, laxity, failure rate, and safety profile. <i>Materials and Methods</i>: The present systematic review followed the 2020 PRISMA guidelines. In December 2024, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were accessed without constraints. All clinical investigations evaluating LEAP for ACL reconstruction were considered. Only studies that considered LET and ALL as LEAP were considered. Only studies using a hamstring tendon autograft associated with LET or ALL were considered. <i>Results</i>: Data from 27 clinical studies (3423 patients) were retrieved. The mean length of follow-up was 61.8 ± 39.5 months. ACL reconstruction using LEAP led to a statistically significant improvement in the Lysholm score (<i>p</i> < 0.01) and IKDC (<i>p</i> < 0.01). The mean joint laxity, as measured by the arthrometer, was 1.5 ± 1.8 mm. Finally, 72.3% (623 of 668) of patients returned to their pre-injury level of sport at a mean of 6.3 ± 4.4 months. At the last follow-up, the LET group showed greater IKDC (<i>p</i> = 0.04). On the other hand, there was a statistically significant greater rate of patients positive to the Lachman test (<i>p</i> < 0.01), return to sport (<i>p</i> < 0.01), and reoperation (<i>p</i> = 0.01). No significant differences were found in Lysholm scores (<i>p</i> = 0.6), Tegner scores (<i>p</i> = 0.2), arthrometer measurements (<i>p</i> = 0.2), Pivot shift test results (<i>p</i> = 0.1), time to return to sport (<i>p</i> = 0.3), and failure rates (<i>p</i> = 0.7). <i>Conclusions</i>: LEAP for ACL reconstructions seems to be effective and safe. Most patients returned to their pre-injury level of sport after a mean of 6 months. LET-based ACL reconstruction may be associated with greater clinical outcomes and a higher reoperation rate compared to ALL-based reconstruction.</p>","PeriodicalId":49830,"journal":{"name":"Medicina-Lithuania","volume":"61 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11857574/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina-Lithuania","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina61020294","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Objectives: The present systematic review investigated the efficacy of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and anterolateral ligament (ALL) as lateral extra-articular procedures (LEAPs) for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. ACL reconstruction using LEAP may reduce graft rupture and rotatory laxity and allow a quicker return to sports. The outcomes of interest were patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), return to sport, laxity, failure rate, and safety profile. Materials and Methods: The present systematic review followed the 2020 PRISMA guidelines. In December 2024, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were accessed without constraints. All clinical investigations evaluating LEAP for ACL reconstruction were considered. Only studies that considered LET and ALL as LEAP were considered. Only studies using a hamstring tendon autograft associated with LET or ALL were considered. Results: Data from 27 clinical studies (3423 patients) were retrieved. The mean length of follow-up was 61.8 ± 39.5 months. ACL reconstruction using LEAP led to a statistically significant improvement in the Lysholm score (p < 0.01) and IKDC (p < 0.01). The mean joint laxity, as measured by the arthrometer, was 1.5 ± 1.8 mm. Finally, 72.3% (623 of 668) of patients returned to their pre-injury level of sport at a mean of 6.3 ± 4.4 months. At the last follow-up, the LET group showed greater IKDC (p = 0.04). On the other hand, there was a statistically significant greater rate of patients positive to the Lachman test (p < 0.01), return to sport (p < 0.01), and reoperation (p = 0.01). No significant differences were found in Lysholm scores (p = 0.6), Tegner scores (p = 0.2), arthrometer measurements (p = 0.2), Pivot shift test results (p = 0.1), time to return to sport (p = 0.3), and failure rates (p = 0.7). Conclusions: LEAP for ACL reconstructions seems to be effective and safe. Most patients returned to their pre-injury level of sport after a mean of 6 months. LET-based ACL reconstruction may be associated with greater clinical outcomes and a higher reoperation rate compared to ALL-based reconstruction.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
应用外侧关节外手术重建前交叉韧带:系统回顾。
背景和目的:本系统综述研究了外侧关节外肌腱固定术(LET)和前外侧韧带(ALL)作为前交叉韧带(ACL)重建的外侧关节外手术(LEAPs)的疗效。使用LEAP重建前交叉韧带可以减少移植物断裂和旋转松弛,并允许更快地恢复运动。关注的结果是患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)、恢复运动、放松、失败率和安全性。材料和方法:本系统评价遵循2020年PRISMA指南。在2024年12月,PubMed, EMBASE和Web of Science可以不受限制地访问。所有评估LEAP用于ACL重建的临床调查都被考虑在内。仅考虑将LET和ALL视为LEAP的研究。仅考虑了与LET或ALL相关的腘绳肌腱自体移植的研究。结果:检索到27项临床研究(3423例患者)的数据。平均随访时间为61.8±39.5个月。使用LEAP重建ACL导致Lysholm评分(p < 0.01)和IKDC (p < 0.01)有统计学意义的改善。关节计测量的平均关节松弛度为1.5±1.8 mm。668例患者中有623例(72.3%)恢复到损伤前运动水平,平均时间为6.3±4.4个月。最后一次随访时,LET组IKDC更高(p = 0.04)。另一方面,拉赫曼试验阳性(p < 0.01)、恢复运动(p < 0.01)和再手术(p = 0.01)的患者比例显著高于对照组(p < 0.01)。Lysholm评分(p = 0.6)、Tegner评分(p = 0.2)、关节计测量(p = 0.2)、Pivot shift测试结果(p = 0.1)、恢复运动时间(p = 0.3)和失败率(p = 0.7)均无显著差异。结论:LEAP用于ACL重建是安全有效的。大多数患者在平均6个月后恢复到损伤前的运动水平。与基于all的ACL重建相比,基于let的ACL重建可能具有更好的临床效果和更高的再手术率。
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
Medicina-Lithuania
Medicina-Lithuania 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
1578
审稿时长
25.04 days
期刊介绍: The journal’s main focus is on reviews as well as clinical and experimental investigations. The journal aims to advance knowledge related to problems in medicine in developing countries as well as developed economies, to disseminate research on global health, and to promote and foster prevention and treatment of diseases worldwide. MEDICINA publications cater to clinicians, diagnosticians and researchers, and serve as a forum to discuss the current status of health-related matters and their impact on a global and local scale.
期刊最新文献
Hemodynamic Monitoring During Liver Transplantation for Patients on Perioperative Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) Support: A Narrative Review. The Role of MDCT Coronary Angiography in the Detection of Benign Varieties and Anomalies of Coronary Blood Vessels-A Narrative Review. An Assessment of the Knowledge of Autism Spectrum Disorder Among Polish Primary Care Physicians. Alterations in von Willebrand Factor Levels in Patients with Malaria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Disease Severity. Use of Quadruple Therapy in the Management of Hypertension: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.
×
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:604180095
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