Comparing Postoperative Outcomes of Isolated Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and the "Terrible Triad" Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Medial Meniscus Ramp and Lateral Meniscus Root Repairs.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Pub Date : 2024-12-20 eCollection Date: 2024-12-01 DOI:10.1177/23259671241303178
Evan P Shoemaker, Luke V Tollefson, Nicholas I Kennedy, Rebecca Stone McGaver, Morgan Homan, Kayla J Sieffert, Ayush D Shah, Corey A Wulf, Christopher M Larson, Brian P Bjerke, Robert F LaPrade
{"title":"Comparing Postoperative Outcomes of Isolated Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and the \"Terrible Triad\" Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Medial Meniscus Ramp and Lateral Meniscus Root Repairs.","authors":"Evan P Shoemaker, Luke V Tollefson, Nicholas I Kennedy, Rebecca Stone McGaver, Morgan Homan, Kayla J Sieffert, Ayush D Shah, Corey A Wulf, Christopher M Larson, Brian P Bjerke, Robert F LaPrade","doi":"10.1177/23259671241303178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>A new \"terrible triad\" has been reported to be an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear with a concomitant medial meniscus ramp tear and lateral meniscus root tear. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for isolated ACL reconstruction (ACLR) versus an ACLR with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs are not well known.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare postoperative outcomes between isolated ACLR and ACLR with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An initial cohort of 1228 patients with ACLRs were retrospectively identified between April 2016 and November 2021. A total of 41 patients with isolated ACLR (isolated cohort) were age and sex matched to 41 patients who had an ACLR with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs (triad cohort). Patients in the triad cohort were identified consecutively by date of surgery. Preoperative and ≥2-year postoperative PROs were evaluated to compare the isolated cohort with the triad cohort. Statistical analysis was performed with unpaired <i>t</i> tests and chi-square tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both the isolated cohort and triad cohort demonstrated significant differences between preoperative and postoperative PROs in all questionnaire categories assessed. Postoperative scores for the International Knee Documentation Committee (isolated, 88.8; triad, 86.2; <i>P</i> = .392), Cincinnati (isolated, 91.1; triad, 88.1; <i>P</i> = .295), and Lysholm (isolated, 92.1; triad, 90.1; <i>P</i> = .472) PROs demonstrated no significant differences between the cohorts. No significant difference was found between the isolated and triad cohorts for all preoperative questionnaire categories. Additionally, no significant difference was found in revision or reoperation rates between isolated and triad patients (<i>P</i> = .733).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No significant differences in PROs were found at minimum follow-up of 2 years postoperatively between the patients who underwent isolated ACLR (isolated cohort) and those who underwent ACLR with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs (triad cohort). Inferior outcomes were not observed in the triad cohort when revision rates, reoperation rates, and postoperative PROs were compared. Given the optimistic short-term outcomes for isolated versus triad ACLR patients and the known biomechanical consequences of these untreated meniscal injuries, medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs should be performed when encountered concurrently with an ACL tear when possible.</p>","PeriodicalId":19646,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"12 12","pages":"23259671241303178"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11662386/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671241303178","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: A new "terrible triad" has been reported to be an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear with a concomitant medial meniscus ramp tear and lateral meniscus root tear. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for isolated ACL reconstruction (ACLR) versus an ACLR with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs are not well known.

Purpose: To compare postoperative outcomes between isolated ACLR and ACLR with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs.

Study design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods: An initial cohort of 1228 patients with ACLRs were retrospectively identified between April 2016 and November 2021. A total of 41 patients with isolated ACLR (isolated cohort) were age and sex matched to 41 patients who had an ACLR with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs (triad cohort). Patients in the triad cohort were identified consecutively by date of surgery. Preoperative and ≥2-year postoperative PROs were evaluated to compare the isolated cohort with the triad cohort. Statistical analysis was performed with unpaired t tests and chi-square tests.

Results: Both the isolated cohort and triad cohort demonstrated significant differences between preoperative and postoperative PROs in all questionnaire categories assessed. Postoperative scores for the International Knee Documentation Committee (isolated, 88.8; triad, 86.2; P = .392), Cincinnati (isolated, 91.1; triad, 88.1; P = .295), and Lysholm (isolated, 92.1; triad, 90.1; P = .472) PROs demonstrated no significant differences between the cohorts. No significant difference was found between the isolated and triad cohorts for all preoperative questionnaire categories. Additionally, no significant difference was found in revision or reoperation rates between isolated and triad patients (P = .733).

Conclusion: No significant differences in PROs were found at minimum follow-up of 2 years postoperatively between the patients who underwent isolated ACLR (isolated cohort) and those who underwent ACLR with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs (triad cohort). Inferior outcomes were not observed in the triad cohort when revision rates, reoperation rates, and postoperative PROs were compared. Given the optimistic short-term outcomes for isolated versus triad ACLR patients and the known biomechanical consequences of these untreated meniscal injuries, medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs should be performed when encountered concurrently with an ACL tear when possible.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
876
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine (OJSM), developed by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), is a global, peer-reviewed, open access journal that combines the interests of researchers and clinical practitioners across orthopaedic sports medicine, arthroscopy, and knee arthroplasty. Topics include original research in the areas of: -Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, including surgical and nonsurgical treatment of orthopaedic sports injuries -Arthroscopic Surgery (Shoulder/Elbow/Wrist/Hip/Knee/Ankle/Foot) -Relevant translational research -Sports traumatology/epidemiology -Knee and shoulder arthroplasty The OJSM also publishes relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信