Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

MARS: The Why and How of It

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Basic Methods Handbook for Clinical Orthopaedic Research

  • 2320 Accesses

Abstract

The Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS Group) was assembled to address the issue of worse outcomes noted for revision ACL reconstructions noted by clinicians. It currently involves 83 surgeons at 52 sites which represents the most sites ever involved in a prospective orthopedic study. Greater than 1200 patients were enrolled, and 2-year follow-up has been completed at better than 80%. As described in this chapter, we have analyzed graft choice, meniscus, articular cartilage, surgical factors, rehabilitation factors, and their impact on outcome. The findings will allow us to counsel and treat patients more appropriately moving forward.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cook NR, Moons KG, Harrell FE Jr. Assessing predictive performance beyond the Framingham risk score. JAMA. 2010;303:1368–9; author reply 1369.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Group M. Meniscal and articular cartilage predictors of clinical outcome following revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2016;44:1671–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. MARS Group (Wright RW corresponding author). Surgical predictors of clinical outcome after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(11):2586–94.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Group M, Group M. Effect of graft choice on the outcome of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) Cohort. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42:2301–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Group M, Wright RW, Huston LJ, Spindler KP, Dunn WR, Haas AK, et al. Descriptive epidemiology of the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) cohort. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38:1979–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Johnson DL, Swenson TM, Irrgang JJ, Fu FH, Harner CD. Revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery: experience from Pittsburgh. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;100–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. MARS Group, Allen CR, Anderson AF, Cooper DE, DeBerardino TM, Dunn WR, et al. Surgical predictors of clinical outcomes after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45:2586–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Spindler KP, Kuhn JE, Freedman KB, Matthews CE, Dittus RS, Harrell FE Jr. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction autograft choice: bone-tendon-bone versus hamstring: does it really matter? A systematic review. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32:1986–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Spindler KP, Warren TA, Callison JC Jr, Secic M, Fleisch SB, Wright RW. Clinical outcome at a minimum of five years after reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1673–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wright R, Spindler K, Huston L, Amendola A, Andrish J, Brophy R, et al. Revision ACL reconstruction outcomes: MOON cohort. J Knee Surg. 2011;24:289–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wright RW, Dunn WR, Amendola A, Andrish JT, Bergfeld J, Kaeding CC, et al. Risk of tearing the intact anterior cruciate ligament in the contralateral knee and rupturing the anterior cruciate ligament graft during the first 2 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective MOON cohort study. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35:1131–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wright RW, Dunn WR, Amendola A, Andrish JT, Flanigan DC, Jones M, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament revision reconstruction: two-year results from the MOON cohort. J Knee Surg. 2007;20:308–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wright RW, Gill CS, Chen L, Brophy RH, Matava MJ, Smith MV, et al. Outcome of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94:531–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wright RW, Magnussen RA, Dunn WR, Spindler KP. Ipsilateral graft and contralateral ACL rupture at five years or more following ACL reconstruction: a systematic review. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:1159–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA

    Rick W. Wright & Amanda K. Haas

  2. Vanderbilt Orthopaedic Institute, Nashville, TN, USA

    Laura J. Huston

Authors
  1. Rick W. Wright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amanda K. Haas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laura J. Huston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rick W. Wright .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. UPMC Rooney Sports Complex, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Volker Musahl

  2. Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Jón Karlsson

  3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Kantonsspital Baselland (Bruderholz, Laufen und Liestal), Bruderholz, Switzerland

    Michael T. Hirschmann

  4. McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Olufemi R. Ayeni

  5. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA

    Robert G. Marx

  6. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL, USA

    Jason L. Koh

  7. Institute for Medical Science in Sports, Osaka Health Science University, Osaka, Japan

    Norimasa Nakamura

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 ISAKOS

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Wright, R.W., Haas, A.K., Huston, L.J. (2019). MARS: The Why and How of It. In: Musahl, V., et al. Basic Methods Handbook for Clinical Orthopaedic Research. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-58254-1_42

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-58254-1_42

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-58253-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-58254-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation