Differences in mechanisms of failure, intraoperative findings, and surgical characteristics between single- and multiple-revision ACL reconstructions: A MARS cohort study

James L. Chen, Christina R. Allen, Thomas E. Stephens, Amanda K. Haas, Laura J. Huston, Rick W. Wright, Brian T. Feeley

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

70 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: The factors that lead to patients failing multiple anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions are not well understood. Hypothesis: Multiple-revision ACL reconstruction will have different characteristics than first-time revision in terms of previous and current graft selection, mode of failure, chondral/meniscal injuries, and surgical charactieristics. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A prospective multicenter ACL revision database was utilized for the time period from March 2006 to June 2011. Patients were divided into those who underwent a single-revision ACL reconstruction and those who underwent multiple-revision ACL reconstructions. The primary outcome variable was Marx activity level. Primary data analyses between the groups included a comparison of graft type, perceived mechanism of failure, associated injury (meniscus, ligament, and cartilage), reconstruction type, and tunnel position. Data were compared by analysis of variance with a post hoc Tukey test. Results: A total of 1200 patients (58% men; median age, 26 years) were enrolled, with 1049 (87%) patients having a primary revision and 151 (13%) patients having a second or subsequent revision. Marx activity levels were significantly higher (9.77) in the primary-revision group than in those patients with multiple revisions (6.74). The most common cause of reruptures was a traumatic, noncontact ACL graft injury in 55% of primary-revision patients; 25% of patients had a nontraumatic, gradual-onset recurrent injury, and 11% had a traumatic, contact injury. In the multiple-revision group, a nontraumatic, gradual-onset injury was the most common cause of recurrence (47%), followed by traumatic noncontact (35%) and nontraumatic sudden onset (11%) (P< .01 between groups). Chondral injuries in the medial compartment were significantly more common in the multiple-revision group than in the single-revision group, as were chondral injuries in the patellofemoral compartment. Conclusion: Patients with multiple-revision ACL reconstructions had lower activity levels, were more likely to have chondral injuries in the medial and patellofemoral compartments, and had a high rate of a nontraumatic, recurrent injury of their graft.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1571-1578
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Sports Medicine
Volume41
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2013

Keywords

  • ACL
  • ACL revision
  • allograft
  • autograft

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Differences in mechanisms of failure, intraoperative findings, and surgical characteristics between single- and multiple-revision ACL reconstructions: A MARS cohort study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this