Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Patient and surgical characteristics that affect revision risk in dynamic intraligamentary stabilization of the anterior cruciate ligament

  • KNEE
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

A Correction to this article was published on 29 August 2018

This article has been updated

Abstract

Purpose

Failure of dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) that requires revision surgery of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) has not been studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of revision ACL surgery, and the patient characteristics and surgery-related factors that are associated with an increased risk of ACL revision after DIS.

Methods

This study analysed a prospective, consecutively documented single-centre case series using standardized case report forms over a 2.5-year follow-up period. The primary endpoint was revision ACL surgery. We used Kaplan–Meier analysis to examine the revision-free survival time, and a multiple logistic regression model of potential risk factors including age, sex, BMI, smoking status, previous contralateral ACL injury, Tegner activity score, interval to surgery, rupture pattern, hardware removal, and postoperative side-to-side difference in knee laxity. Relative risk was calculated for subgroups of significant risk factors.

Results

In total, 381 patients (195 male) with a mean age of 33 ± 12 years were included in the analysis. The incidence of revision ACL surgery was 30/381 (7.9%). Younger age (p = 0.001), higher Tegner activity score (p = 0.003), and increased knee laxity (p = 0.015) were significantly associated with revision ACL surgery. The increased relative risk for patients who were less than 24 years old, participated in activities at a Tegner level >5 points, or had >2 mm of side-to-side difference in knee laxity was 1.6, 3.7, and 2.3, respectively.

Conclusion

Young age, high level of sport activity, and high knee laxity observed in follow-up examinations increased the likelihood for revision surgery after DIS. Patients undergoing DIS should be informed of their potentially increased risk for therapy failure and carefully monitored during recovery.

Level of evidence

Case series, Level IV.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

  • 29 August 2018

    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake.

References

  1. Andernord D, Desai N, Bjornsson H, Ylander M, Karlsson J, Samuelsson K (2015) Patient predictors of early revision surgery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cohort study of 16,930 patients with 2-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 43:121–127

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Andriolo L, Filardo G, Kon E, Ricci M, Della Villa F, Della Villa S et al (2015) Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: clinical outcome and evidence for return to sport. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:2825–2845

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Barber-Westin SD, Noyes FR (2011) Objective criteria for return to athletics after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and subsequent reinjury rates: a systematic review. Phys Sportsmed 39:100–110

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Barrett GR, Luber K, Replogle WH, Manley JL (2010) Allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the young, active patient: Tegner activity level and failure rate. Arthroscopy 26:1593–1601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Biau DJ, Tournoux C, Katsahian S, Schranz PJ, Nizard RS (2006) Bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts versus hamstring autografts for reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament: meta-analysis. BMJ 332:995–1001

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Borchers JR, Pedroza A, Kaeding C (2009) Activity level and graft type as risk factors for anterior cruciate ligament graft failure: a case-control study. Am J Sports Med 37:2362–2367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Buchler L, Regli D, Evangelopoulos DS, Bieri K, Ahmad SS, Krismer A et al (2016) Functional recovery following primary ACL repair with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization. Knee 23:549–553

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cimino F, Volk BS, Setter D (2010) Anterior cruciate ligament injury: diagnosis, management, and prevention. Am Fam Physician 82:917–922

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Crawford SN, Waterman BR, Lubowitz JH (2013) Long-term failure of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 29:1566–1571

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Duffee RA, Hewett ET, Kaeding CC (2014) Revision ACL reconstruction—introduction to patient-related risk factors for acl graft failures. Springer, New York, pp 1–10

    Google Scholar 

  11. Eggli S, Kohlhof H, Zumstein M, Henle P, Hartel M, Evangelopoulos DS et al (2015) Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization: novel technique for preserving the ruptured ACL. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:1215–1221

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Engelman GH, Carry PM, Hitt KG, Polousky JD, Vidal AF (2014) Comparison of allograft versus autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction graft survival in an active adolescent cohort. Am J Sports Med 42:2311–2318

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Evangelopoulos DS, Kohl S, Schwienbacher S, Gantenbein B, Exadaktylos A, Ahmad SS (2015) Collagen application reduces complication rates of mid-substance ACL tears treated with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3838-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gabler CM, Jacobs CA, Howard JS, Mattacola CG, Johnson DL (2015) Comparison of graft failure rate between autografts placed via an anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction technique: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Am J Sports Med. doi:10.1177/0363546515584043

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Grassi A, Ardern CL, Marcheggiani Muccioli GM, Neri MP, Marcacci M, Zaffagnini S (2016) Does revision ACL reconstruction measure up to primary surgery? A meta-analysis comparing patient-reported and clinician-reported outcomes, and radiographic results. Br J Sports Med 50:716–724

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Henle P, Roder C, Perler G, Heitkemper S, Eggli S (2015) Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) for treatment of acute anterior cruciate ligament ruptures: case series experience of the first three years. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 16:27

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Hewett TE, Di Stasi SL, Myer GD (2013) Current concepts for injury prevention in athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 41:216–224

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kaeding CC, Pedroza AD, Reinke EK, Huston LJ, Consortium M, Spindler KP (2015) Risk factors and predictors of subsequent ACL injury in either knee after ACL reconstruction: prospective analysis of 2488 primary ACL reconstructions from the MOON cohort. Am J Sports Med 43:1583–1590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kohl S, Evangelopoulos DS, Schar MO, Bieri K, Muller T, Ahmad SS (2016) Dynamic intraligamentary stabilisation: initial experience with treatment of acute ACL ruptures. Bone Joint J 98-B:793–798

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Laboute E, Savalli L, Puig P et al (2010) Analysis of return to competition and repeat rupture for 298 anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions with patellar or hamstring tendon autograft in sportspeople. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 53:598–614

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lam MH, Fong DT, Yung P, Ho EP, Chan WY, Chan KM (2009) Knee stability assessment on anterior cruciate ligament injury: clinical and biomechanical approaches. Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol 1:20

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Liechti DJ, Chahla J, Dean CS et al (2016) Outcomes and risk factors of rerevision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. Arthroscopy. doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2016.04.017

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Noyes FR (2010) Noyes’ knee disorders: surgery, rehabilitation, clinical outcomes. Elsevier, Philadelphia, pp 282–283

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pinczewski LA, Lyman J, Salmon LJ, Russell VJ, Roe J, Linklater J (2007) A 10-year comparison of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions with hamstring tendon and patellar tendon autograft: a controlled, prospective trial. Am J Sports Med 35:564–574

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Reinhardt KR, Hetsroni I, Marx RG (2010) Graft selection for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a level I systematic review comparing failure rates and functional outcomes. Orthop Clin North Am 41:249–262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Salmon L, Russell V, Musgrove T, Pinczewski L, Refshauge K (2005) Incidence and risk factors for graft rupture and contralateral rupture after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 21:948–957

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Schlumberger M, Schuster P, Schulz M, Immendorfer M, Mayer P, Bartholoma J et al (2015) Traumatic graft rupture after primary and revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: retrospective analysis of incidence and risk factors in 2915 cases. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3699-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sernert N, Kartus J, Kohler K et al (1999) Analysis of subjective, objective and functional examination tests after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A follow-up of 527 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 7:160–165

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Shelbourne KD, Gray T, Haro M (2009) Incidence of subsequent injury to either knee within 5 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon autograft. Am J Sports Med 37:246–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sullivan GM, Artino AR Jr (2013) Analyzing and interpreting data from likert-type scales. J Grad Med Educ 5:541–542

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Tegner Y, Lysholm J (1985) Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 191:43–49

    Google Scholar 

  32. Tejwani SG, Chen J, Funahashi TT, Love R, Maletis GB (2015) Revision risk after allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: association with graft processing techniques, patient characteristics, and graft type. Am J Sports Med 43:2696–2705

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Webster KE, Feller JA (2016) Exploring the high reinjury rate in younger patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 44:2827–2832

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Webster KE, Feller JA, Leigh WB, Richmond AK (2014) Younger patients are at increased risk for graft rupture and contralateral injury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 42:641–647

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Edith Hofer for her hard work in coordinating, supervising, and completing the collection of the comprehensive dataset for each patient. They also thank Kelly Goodwin and Christopher Ritter for manuscript editing.

Author’s contribution

PH was one of the treating surgeons, conceived the study, interpreted the data and helped drafting the manuscript. KSB participated in the design of the study, conducted statistical analyses, interpreted the data and drafted the manuscript. EA participated in the design of the study, helped to interpret the data, to perform the statistical analysis, and supervised the drafting of the manuscript. JH participated in the design of the study, helped to interpret the data and revised the manuscript. JB participated in the design of the study, supervised the statistical analyses and revised the manuscript. MB helped in data acquisition and revised the manuscript. MK helped in data acquisition and revised the manuscript. SE was one of the treating surgeons, supervised the complete study and revised the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Philipp Henle and Kathrin S. Bieri have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Knee Surgery and Sports Traumatology, Sonnenhof Orthopaedic Center, Bern, Switzerland

    Philipp Henle, Janosch Haeberli, Martina Kess & Stefan Eggli

  2. Swiss RDL, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Finkenhubelweg 11, 3012, Bern, Switzerland

    Kathrin S. Bieri & Emin Aghayev

  3. Institute of Mathematical Statistics and Actuarial Science, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

    Jessica Bettfuehr

  4. Faculty of Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland

    Manuel Brand

Authors
  1. Philipp Henle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kathrin S. Bieri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manuel Brand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Emin Aghayev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jessica Bettfuehr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Janosch Haeberli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Martina Kess
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Stefan Eggli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathrin S. Bieri.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

PH and SE act as clinical advisers for Mathys AG Bettlach, Switzerland. The PhD project of KSB is partially funded by Mathys AG Bettlach, Switzerland. JB is employed by Mathys AG Bettlach, Switzerland.

Funding

No funding was received for this study.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Henle, P., Bieri, K.S., Brand, M. et al. Patient and surgical characteristics that affect revision risk in dynamic intraligamentary stabilization of the anterior cruciate ligament. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26, 1182–1189 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4574-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4574-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation