Outcomes after Multiligament Knee Injury Reconstruction using Novel Graft Constructs and Techniques

John Hee-Young Lee; James L. Cook; Nichole Wilson; Kylee Rucinski; James P. Stannard

doi:10.1055/s-0040-1716356

The Journal of Knee Surgery, Inhaltsverzeichnis

J Knee Surg 2022; 35(05): 502-510
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1716356

Original Article

Outcomes after Multiligament Knee Injury Reconstruction using Novel Graft Constructs and Techniques

Autoren

John Hee-Young Lee

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
James L. Cook

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri

²Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Thompson Laboratory for Regenerative Orthopaedics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri

³Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mizzou BioJoint Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
Nichole Wilson

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri

³Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mizzou BioJoint Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
Kylee Rucinski

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri

³Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mizzou BioJoint Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri
James P. Stannard

¹Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri

²Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Thompson Laboratory for Regenerative Orthopaedics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri

³Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mizzou BioJoint Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri

Abstract

Clinical outcomes after reconstruction for multiligamentous knee injury (MLKI) can be consistently favorable. However, recent implants and technique advances may allow for improvement in outcomes. Our institution has developed novel graft constructs and techniques for reconstructions with preclinical data supporting clinical use. Our study purpose was to assess clinical outcomes after reconstruction for MKLI using our constructs and techniques. Overall success rate, failure/revision rates, return to work (RTW)/return to sports (RTS) rates, and complications were evaluated testing the hypothesis that novel methods would be associated with clinical benefits with respect to applications and outcomes compared with historical results. We reviewed a single-surgeon, longitudinal database of 42 patients who underwent multiligament reconstruction at our institution using these techniques for at least two-ligament injuries. Visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score and PROMIS (patient-reported outcomes measurement information system) were collected preoperatively and postoperatively at a minimum 1-year follow-up. Among these patients, 33 patients (mean age of 28.9 years, mean body mass index (BMI) of 33.2 kg/m², mean follow-up of 14.2 months) were included for outcomes analyses. With the definition of success as having a VAS score of less than or equal to 2 without revision/salvage surgery due to recurrent/residual instability or arthritis, overall success rate was 88% (29/33). The mean VAS scores improved from 5 ± 2 to 2 ± 2. The mean preoperative PROMIS mental health score was 36.2 ± 7, general health was 33.5 ± 6, pain was 62.7 ± 8, and physical function score was 29.4 ± 3. At the final follow-up, PROMIS MH was 50.2 ± 10, GH was 44.4 ± 9, pain was 54.3 ± 9, and PF was 42.6 ± 8.4. Return to work rate was 94% (31/33), and 52% (17/33) of patients were able to RTS at any level. Our results demonstrated excellent clinical outcomes associated with a primary success rate of 88% and RTW rate of 94%. Intraoperative complications occurred in 9.5% of cases and revision and failure rates were 9% and 3%, respectively. Our initial results suggest that multiligament reconstructions using novel graft constructs and techniques are safe and effective and can be considered an appropriate option for reconstruction of the full clinical spectrum of MLKIs.

Keywords

multiligament knee injury - multiligament reconstruction - anterior cruciate ligament - posterior cruciate ligament - posterolateral corner

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Sillanpää PJ, Kannus P, Niemi ST, Rolf C, Felländer-Tsai L, Mattila VM. Incidence of knee dislocation and concomitant vascular injury requiring surgery: a nationwide study. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2014; 76 (03) 715-719
2 Levy BA, Marx RG. Outcome after knee dislocation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2009; 17 (09) 1011-1012
3 Fanelli GC, Stannard JP, Stuart MJ. et al. Management of complex knee ligament injuries. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2010; 92 (12) 2235-2246
4 Stannard JP, Brown SL, Farris RC, McGwin Jr G, Volgas DA. The posterolateral corner of the knee: repair versus reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 2005; 33 (06) 881-888
5 Stannard JP, Stannard JT, Cook JL. Repair or reconstruction in acute posterolateral instability of the knee: decision making and surgical technique introduction. J Knee Surg 2015; 28 (06) 450-454
6 Levy BA, Fanelli GC, Whelan DB. et al. Knee Dislocation Study Group.. Controversies in the treatment of knee dislocations and multiligament reconstruction. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2009; 17 (04) 197-206
7 Liow RY, McNicholas MJ, Keating JF, Nutton RW. Ligament repair and reconstruction in traumatic dislocation of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003; 85 (06) 845-851
8 Geeslin AG, Moulton SG, LaPrade RF. A systematic review of the outcomes of posterolateral corner knee injuries, part 1: surgical treatment of acute injuries. Am J Sports Med 2016; 44 (05) 1336-1342
9 Woodmass JM, O'Malley MP, Krych AJ. et al. Revision multiligament knee reconstruction: clinical outcomes and proposed treatment algorithm. Arthroscopy 2018; 34 (03) 736-744.e3
10 Engebretsen L, Risberg MA, Robertson B, Ludvigsen TC, Johansen S. Outcome after knee dislocations: a 2-9 years follow-up of 85 consecutive patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2009; 17 (09) 1013-1026
11 Bratton AD, Harner CD, Miller TL. Revision surgery in the posterior cruciate ligament and multiple-ligament injured knee. In: Fanelli GC. ed. The Multiple Ligament Injured Knee: A Practical Guide to Management. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2019: 317-332
12 King AH, Krych AJ, Prince MR, Sousa PL, Stuart MJ, Levy BA. Are meniscal tears and articular cartilage injury predictive of inferior patient outcome after surgical reconstruction for the dislocated knee?. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2015; 23 (10) 3008-3011
13 Aboalata M, Elazab A, Halawa A, Ahmed MS, Imhoff AB, Bassiouny Y. The crossing internal suture augmentation technique to protect the all-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction graft. Arthrosc Tech 2017; 6 (06) e2235-e2240
14 Gilmer BB, Crall T, DeLong J, Kubo T, Mackay G, Jani SS. Biomechanical analysis of internal bracing for treatment of medial knee injuries. Orthopedics 2016; 39 (03) e532-e537
15 Trasolini NA, Lindsay A, Cooper J, George F. Internal bracing in multiple-ligament knee reconstruction. In: Fanelli GC. ed. The Multiple Ligament Injured Knee: A Practical Guide to Management. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2019: 475-488
16 Prince MR, Stuart MJ, King AH, Sousa PL, Levy BA. All-inside posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: GraftLink technique. Arthrosc Tech 2015; 4 (05) e619-e624
17 Vertullo CJ, Piepenbrink M, Smith PA, Wilson AJ, Wijdicks CA. Biomechanical testing of three alternative quadrupled tendon graft constructs with adjustable loop suspensory fixation for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction compared with four-strand grafts fixed with screws and femoral fixed loop devices. Am J Sports Med 2019; 47 (04) 828-836
18 Wood R, Robinson J, Getgood A. Anatomic posterolateral corner reconstruction using single graft plus adjustable-loop suspensory fixation device. Arthrosc Tech 2019; 8 (03) e301-e309
19 Lanzetti RM, Monaco E, De Carli A. et al. Can an adjustable-loop length suspensory fixation device reduce femoral tunnel enlargement in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A prospective computer tomography study. Knee 2016; 23 (05) 837-841
20 Colombet P, Graveleau N, Jambou S. Incorporation of hamstring grafts within the tibial tunnel after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: magnetic resonance imaging of suspensory fixation versus interference screws. Am J Sports Med 2016; 44 (11) 2838-2845
21 Smith PA, Piepenbrink M, Smith SK, Bachmaier S, Bedi A, Wijdicks CA. Adjustable-versus fixed-loop devices for femoral fixation in ACL reconstruction: an in vitro full-construct biomechanical study of surgical technique-based tibial fixation and graft preparation. Orthop J Sports Med 2018; 6 (04) 2325967118768743
22 Freychet B, Desai VS, Sanders TL. et al. All-inside posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: surgical technique and outcome. Clin Sports Med 2019; 38 (02) 285-295
23 Kim SG, Kurosawa H, Sakuraba K, Ikeda H, Takazawa S, Takazawa Y. Development and application of an inside-to-out drill bit for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 2005; 21 (08) 1012
24 Cook JL, Smith P, Stannard JP. et al. A canine arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction model for study of synthetic augmentation of tendon allografts. J Knee Surg 2017; 30 (07) 704-711
25 Smith PA, Stannard JP, Pfeiffer FM, Kuroki K, Bozynski CC, Cook JL. Suspensory versus interference screw fixation for arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in a translational large-animal model. Arthroscopy 2016; 32 (06) 1086-1097
26 Smith PA, Bley JA. Allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction utilizing internal brace augmentation. Arthrosc Tech 2016; 5 (05) e1143-e1147
27 Stannard JP, Deasis D. Surgical treatment of combined PCL medial and lateral side injuries: acute and chronic. In: Fanelli GC. ed. The Multiple Ligament Injured Knee: A Practical Guide to Management. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2019: 255-271
28 Nuelle CW, Milles JL, Pfeiffer FM. et al. Biomechanical comparison of five posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques. J Knee Surg 2017; 30 (06) 523-531
29 Stannard JP, Bauer KL. Current concepts in knee dislocations: PCL, ACL, and medial sided injuries. J Knee Surg 2012; 25 (04) 287-294
30 Bauer KL, Stannard JP. Surgical approach to the posteromedial corner: indications, technique, outcomes. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 2013; 6 (02) 124-131
31 Worley JR, Brimmo O, Nuelle CW. et al. Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction after surgical management of multiligament knee injury. J Knee Surg 2020; (e-pub ahead of print).
32 Worley JR, Brimmo O, Nuelle CW, Cook JL, Stannard JP. Incidence of concurrent peroneal nerve injury in multiligament knee injuries and outcomes after knee reconstruction. J Knee Surg 2019; 32 (06) 560-564
33 Cook JL, Cook CR, Bozynski CC, Bezold WA, Stannard JP. Development and assessment of novel multi-ligament knee injury reconstruction graft constructs and techniques. J Knee Surg 2020;
34 Stannard JP, Schenck Jr RC, Fanelli GC. Knee Dislocations and Fracture-Dislocations. In: Bucholz RW, Heckmann JD, Court-Brown CM, Tornetta III P. eds. Rockwood and Green's Fractures in Adults. 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010: 1861
35 Stannard JP, Brown SL, Robinson JT, McGwin Jr G, Volgas DA. Reconstruction of the posterolateral corner of the knee. Arthroscopy 2005; 21 (09) 1051-1059
36 Stannard JP, Nuelle CW, McGwin G, Volgas DA. Hinged external fixation in the treatment of knee dislocations: a prospective randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96 (03) 184-191
37 Stannard JP, Sheils TM, McGwin G, Volgas DA, Alonso JE. Use of a hinged external knee fixator after surgery for knee dislocation. Arthroscopy 2003; 19 (06) 626-631
38 Trasolini NA, Korber S, Gipsman A, San AE, Weber AE, Hatch III GFR. Performance of PROMIS computer adaptive testing as compared with established instruments for multiple-ligament knee injuries. Orthop J Sports Med 2019; 7 (09) 2325967119867419
39 Arthur A, LaPrade RF, Agel J. Proximal tibial opening wedge osteotomy as the initial treatment for chronic posterolateral corner deficiency in the varus knee: a prospective clinical study. Am J Sports Med 2007; 35 (11) 1844-1850
40 Noyes FR, Barber-Westin SD, Albright JC. An analysis of the causes of failure in 57 consecutive posterolateral operative procedures. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34 (09) 1419-1430
41 Werner BC, Gwathmey Jr FW, Higgins ST, Hart JM, Miller MD. Ultra-low velocity knee dislocations: patient characteristics, complications, and outcomes. Am J Sports Med 2014; 42 (02) 358-363
42 Ridley TJ, Cook S, Bollier M. et al. Effect of body mass index on patients with multiligamentous knee injuries. Arthroscopy 2014; 30 (11) 1447-1452
43 Dwyer T, Marx RG, Whelan D. Outcomes of treatment of multiple ligament knee injuries. J Knee Surg 2012; 25 (04) 317-326
44 Everhart JS, Du A, Chalasani R, Kirven JC, Magnussen RA, Flanigan DC. Return to work or sport after multiligament knee injury: a systematic review of 21 studies and 524 patients. Arthroscopy 2018; 34 (05) 1708-1716
45 Barrow AE, Sheean AJ, Burns TC. Return to duty following combat-related multi-ligamentous knee injury. Injury 2017; 48 (04) 861-865
46 Brophy RH, Gray BL, Nunley RM, Barrack RL, Clohisy JC. Total knee arthroplasty after previous knee surgery: expected interval and the effect on patient age. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96 (10) 801-805
47 Fanelli GC, Sousa PL, Edson CJ. Long-term follow up of surgically treated knee dislocations: stability restored, but arthritis is common. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472 (09) 2712-2717
48 Moatshe G, Dornan GJ, Ludvigsen T, Løken S, LaPrade RF, Engebretsen L. High prevalence of knee osteoarthritis at a minimum 10-year follow-up after knee dislocation surgery. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2017; 25 (12) 3914-3922
49 Pancio SI, Sousa PL, Krych AJ. et al. Increased risk of revision, reoperation, and implant constraint in TKA after multiligament knee surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2017; 475 (06) 1618-1626
50 Levy NM, Krych AJ, Hevesi M. et al. Does age predict outcome after multiligament knee reconstruction for the dislocated knee? 2- to 22-year follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2015; 23 (10) 3003-3007