Emerging Trends in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Abstract

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is one of the most commonly performed and researched orthopedic procedures. As technology and comparative research have advanced, surgical practices have changed to achieve a superior outcome. Our group performed a survey of orthopedic surgeons to evaluate current practice trends and techniques as a follow-up to similar surveys performed in 1999 and 2006. In a survey between 2013 and 2014 consisting of 35 questions regarding the surgical technique, graft choice, fixation method, and perioperative care in ACL reconstruction was sent electronically to the members of the American Orthopaedic Society of Sports Medicine and the Arthroscopy Association of North America. Responses were recorded and compared with previous results. Survey responses were received from 824 active surgeons. Of the respondents, 89.4% are subspecialty trained, 98% of which in sports medicine. Preoperatively, full-knee extension was the only “very significant” factor in surgical timing. Approach preference via an arthroscopic-assisted single-incision approach predominated (89%)—similar to earlier results. Bone-patellar-tendon-bone use decreased relative to hamstring allograft at 45 and 41%, respectively. Tibial tunnel placement shifted anteriorly and femoral tunnel placement shifted posterosuperiorly as compared with the results obtained 5 years ago. Femoral drilling through a low medial portal was preferred in 47% of responses, increased from 15%. Preferred fixation on both the tibial and femoral sides was either metal or bioabsorbable interference screws. The use of transfixation pins and other devices decreased. Postoperative rehab protocols did not significantly change, 68.7% preferred full-weight bearing, 55% using a range of motion knee brace locked in extension, 66.4% starting physical therapy 1 week postoperatively, with unrestricted activity at 6 to 9 months. Overall, an increasing trend toward using hamstring autograft and drilling the femoral tunnel through an accessory portal in primary ACL reconstruction was observed. This may reflect recent literature supporting more anatomic reconstruction of the ACL. Considerations including deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis, brace use, timing of surgery, weight-bearing restrictions, physical therapy, graft choice in athletes, and return to activity remained largely unchanged.

Keywords

ACL - reconstruction - trend - survey

• References

• 1 Lyman S, Koulouvaris P, Sherman S, Do H, Mandl LA, Marx RG. Epidemiology of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: trends, readmissions, and subsequent knee surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91 (10) 2321-2328
• 2 Delay BS, Smolinski RJ, Wind WM, Bowman DS. Current practices and opinions in ACL reconstruction and rehabilitation: results of a survey of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine. Am J Knee Surg 2001; 14 (2) 85-91
• 3 Duquin TR, Wind WM, Fineberg MS, Smolinski RJ, Buyea CM. Current trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Knee Surg 2009; 22 (1) 7-12
• 4 Tompkins M, Milewski MD, Brockmeier SF, Gaskin CM, Hart JM, Miller MD. Anatomic femoral tunnel drilling in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: use of an accessory medial portal versus traditional transtibial drilling. Am J Sports Med 2012; 40 (6) 1313-1321
• 5 Arnold MP, Duthon V, Neyret P, Hirschmann MT. Double incision iso-anatomical ACL reconstruction: the freedom to place the femoral tunnel within the anatomical attachment site without exception. Int Orthop 2013; 37 (2) 247-251
• 6 Shin YS, Ro KH, Lee JH, Lee DH. Location of the femoral tunnel aperture in single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: comparison of the transtibial, anteromedial portal, and outside-in techniques. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41 (11) 2533
• 7 Miller MD, Hinkin DT. The “N + 7 rule” for tibial tunnel placement in endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 1996; 12 (1) 124-126
• 8 Slone HS, Romine SE, Premkumar A, Xerogeanes JW. Quadriceps tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comprehensive review of current literature and systematic review of clinical results. Arthroscopy 2015; 31 (3) 541-554
• 9 Kraeutler MJ, Bravman JT, McCarty EC. Bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft versus allograft in outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of 5182 patients. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41 (10) 2439-2448
• 10 Mohtadi N, Chan D, Barber R, Oddone Paolucci E. A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Patellar Tendon, Hamstring Tendon, and Double-Bundle ACL Reconstructions: Patient-Reported and Clinical Outcomes at a Minimal 2-Year Follow-up. Clin J Sport Med 2015; 25 (4) 321-331
• 11 Sajovic M, Strahovnik A, Dernovsek MZ, Skaza K. Quality of life and clinical outcome comparison of semitendinosus and gracilis tendon versus patellar tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an 11-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Am J Sports Med 2011; 39 (10) 2161-2169
• 12 Xie X, Liu X, Chen Z, Yu Y, Peng S, Li Q. A meta-analysis of bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft versus four-strand hamstring tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee 2015; 22 (2) 100-110
• 13 Zelle BA, Vidal AF, Brucker PU, Fu FH. Double-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: anatomic and biomechanical rationale. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2007; 15 (2) 87-96