HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 35/12/2057    most recent 0363546507307391v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Battaglia, M. J. Articles by Warren, R. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Battaglia, M. J., II Articles by Warren, R. F. Related Collections Reconstruction Graft fixation

Results of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Surgery

From the Department of Shoulder and Sports Medicine, Hospital for Special Surgery, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, New York

^* Address correspondence to Michael J. Battaglia II, MD, Varsity Athletics and Football Team Physician, United States Naval Academy, 250 Wood Road, Annapolis, MD 21402 (e-mail: ttags{at}yahoo.com).

Background: Revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery remains challenging.

Purpose: To analyze the authors’ experience with revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery and determine the association between stability and functional results.

Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods: Between 1991 and 2002, 95 of 102 patients who underwent revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at the authors’ institution met the criteria for inclusion in the study. Of those, the 63 (66%) who returned for complete clinical and radiologic evaluation (mean follow-up, 72.7 months) formed the study group. Subjective evaluation focused on return to sports, arthritic symptoms, and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee criteria. Clinical evaluation included examination, KT-1000 arthrometer and functional testing, and radiographic analysis of alignment and arthritis.

Results: Based on International Knee Documentation Committee subjective scores and return to sports, results were rated as excellent/good in 45 patients (71%), fair in 6 (10%), and poor in 12 (19%). A grade IA or IIA Lachman and a KT-1000 arthrometer side-to-side difference of <3 mm (32/63 patients) was associated with a good/excellent result (P < .05). The mechanical axis was midline in 78% (49/63 patients). Radiographic arthritis (16 patients, 25%) was associated with duration of instability after primary failure (P < .03). Return to sports occurred in 59% (37/63 patients). Sixteen patients (25%) required a second revision surgery.

Conclusion: Revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery allowed approximately 60% of patients to go back to sports, most of them at lower levels than their prerevision function. Instrumented laxity of <3 mm was associated with a better result. Radiographic arthritis was associated with duration of instability symptoms after primary failure. Patients who undergo revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery should be counseled as to the expected outcome and cautioned that this procedure probably represents a salvage situation and may not allow them to return to their desired levels of function.

Key Words: anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) • graft choice • failure • reinjury • revision anterior cruciate ligament