The Development and Early to Midterm Findings of the Multicenter Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Study

Abstract

Revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction can present a series of unique challenges for the both the patient and the treating surgeon. The Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) was established to identify the factors contributing to ACL graft failure and report on the outcomes following revision reconstruction. In this article we review the development and early to midterm findings of the MARS group.

Keywords

ACL - reconstruction - multicenter

• References

• 1 Gottlob CA, Baker Jr CL. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: socioeconomic issues and cost effectiveness. Am J Orthop 2000; 29 (6) 472-476
• 2 Gottlob CA, Baker Jr CL, Pellissier JM, Colvin L. Cost effectiveness of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in young adults. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999; (367) 272-282
• 3 Taylor DC, DeBerardino TM, Nelson BJ , et al. Patellar tendon versus hamstring tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized controlled trial using similar femoral and tibial fixation methods. Am J Sports Med 2009; 37 (10) 1946-1957
• 4 Sajovic M, Vengust V, Komadina R, Tavcar R, Skaza K. A prospective, randomized comparison of semitendinosus and gracilis tendon versus patellar tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: five-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34 (12) 1933-1940
• 5 Spindler KP, Kuhn JE, Freedman KB, Matthews CE, Dittus RS, Harrell Jr FE. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction autograft choice: bone-tendon-bone versus hamstring: does it really matter? A systematic review. Am J Sports Med 2004; 32 (8) 1986-1995
• 6 Wright RW, Gill CS, Chen L , et al. Outcome of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012; 94 (6) 531-536
• 7 Wright RW, Huston LJ, Spindler KP , et al; MARS Group. Descriptive epidemiology of the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) cohort. Am J Sports Med 2010; 38 (10) 1979-1986
• 8 Bogunovic L, Yang J, Wright RW. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: contemporary revision options. Op Tech Sports Med 2013; 21 (1) 64-71
• 9 Wright R, Spindler K, Huston L , et al. Revision ACL reconstruction outcomes: MOON cohort. J Knee Surg 2011; 24 (4) 289-294
• 10 Wright RW, Dunn WR, Amendola A , et al; MOON Cohort. Anterior cruciate ligament revision reconstruction: two-year results from the MOON cohort. J Knee Surg 2007; 20 (4) 308-311
• 11 Uribe JW, Hechtman KS, Zvijac JE, Tjin-A-Tsoi EW. Revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery: experience from Miami. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996; (325) 91-99
• 12 Carson EW, Anisko EM, Restrepo C, Panariello RA, O'Brien SJ, Warren RF. Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: etiology of failures and clinical results. J Knee Surg 2004; 17 (3) 127-132
• 13 Garofalo R, Djahangiri A, Siegrist O. Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with quadriceps tendon-patellar bone autograft. Arthroscopy 2006; 22 (2) 205-214
• 14 Johnson DL, Swenson TM, Irrgang JJ, Fu FH, Harner CD. Revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery: experience from Pittsburgh. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996; (325) 100-109
• 15 Outerbridge RE. The etiology of chondromalacia patellae. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1961; 43-B: 752-757
• 16 Group M ; MARS Group. Radiographic findings in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions from the Mars cohort. J Knee Surg 2013; 26 (4) 239-247
• 17 Kaeding CC, Aros B, Pedroza A , et al. Allograft Versus Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Predictors of Failure From a MOON Prospective Longitudinal Cohort. Sports Health 2011; 3 (1) 73-81
• 18 Ellis HB, Matheny LM, Briggs KK, Pennock AT, Steadman JR. Outcomes and revision rate after bone-patellar tendon-bone allograft versus autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in patients aged 18 years or younger with closed physes. Arthroscopy 2012; 28 (12) 1819-1825