Failure Rates and Complications After Multiple-Revision ACL Reconstruction: Comparison of the Over-the-Top and Transportal Drilling Techniques

Background: Multiple-revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) presents several technical challenges, often due to residual hardware, tunnel widening, malposition, or staged surgeries. Purpose: To compare failure and complication rates between the over-the-top (OTT) and transportal drilling (TD) techniques in patients undergoing surgery for failed revision ACLR. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The medical records of patients with at least 2 revision ACLRs using either the OTT or TD technique were reviewed retrospectively. Data on patient demographics, graft characteristics, number of revisions, concomitant procedures, complications, and failures were collected. Between-group comparisons of continuous and categorical variables were conducted with the independent-samples t test and the Fisher exact or chi-square test, respectively. Results: A total of 101 patients undergoing multiple-revision ACLR with OTT (n = 37, 37%) and TD (n = 64, 63%) techniques were included for analysis. The mean follow-up time was 60 months (range, 12-196 months). There were no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, laterality, or follow-up length between groups (P > .05). Allograft was the graft used most frequently (n = 64; 67.3%) with no significant differences between groups in graft diameter (P > .05). There were no statistically significant differences between groups regarding rate of concurrent medial and lateral meniscus, cartilage, or lateral extra-articular procedures (P > .05). There was also no significant66 between-group difference in complication rate (OTT: n = 2 [5.4%]; TD: n = 8 [13%]) or graft failure rate (OTT: n = 4 [11%]; TD: n = 14 [22%]) (P > .05 for both). Conclusion: The results of this study showed notably high failure and complication rates in challenging multiple-revision ACLR. Complication and failure rates were similar between techniques, demonstrating that the OTT technique is a valuable alternative that can be used in a revision ACLR, particularly as a single-stage approach when the single-stage TD technique is not possible.

[1]  L. Engebretsen,et al.  ACL Reconstruction Patients Have Increased Risk of Knee Arthroplasty at 15 Years of Follow-up , 2022, JB & JS open access.

[2]  M. Marcacci,et al.  Over-the-top Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction plus lateral plasty with hamstrings in high-school athletes: Results at 10 years. , 2021, The Knee.

[3]  Freddie H. Fu,et al.  ACL graft with extra-cortical fixation rotates around the femoral tunnel aperture during knee flexion , 2021, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[4]  V. Musahl,et al.  A high tibial slope, allograft use, and poor patient-reported outcome scores are associated with multiple ACL graft failures , 2021, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[5]  Andy Williams,et al.  Single-Stage Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Experience With 91 Patients (40 Elite Athletes) Using an Algorithm , 2020, The American journal of sports medicine.

[6]  T. Gill,et al.  Patient-Reported Outcomes After Multiple-Revision ACL Reconstruction: Good but Not Great , 2020, Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation.

[7]  D. E. Cooper,et al.  Meniscal Repair in the Setting of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Results From the MARS Cohort , 2020, The American journal of sports medicine.

[8]  R. Marx,et al.  Incidence and Predictors of Subsequent Surgery After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A 6-Year Follow-up Study , 2020, The American journal of sports medicine.

[9]  R. Lanzetti,et al.  Over the top anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in patients with open physes: a long-term follow-up study , 2020, International Orthopaedics.

[10]  Freddie H. Fu,et al.  Over-the-top ACL reconstruction restores anterior and rotatory knee laxity in skeletally immature individuals and revision settings , 2019, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[11]  J. Xerogeanes,et al.  Risk Factors for Manipulation Under Anesthesia and/or Lysis of Adhesions After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction , 2018, Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine.

[12]  V. Musahl,et al.  Over-the-top ACL reconstruction yields comparable outcomes to traditional ACL reconstruction in primary and revision settings: a systematic review , 2018, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[13]  R. Rossi,et al.  Combined Intra- and Extra-Articular Technique in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction , 2017, Joints.

[14]  A. Amendola,et al.  What Is the Mid-term Failure Rate of Revision ACL Reconstruction? A Systematic Review , 2017, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[15]  P. Di Benedetto,et al.  Causes of Failure of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Revision Surgical Strategies , 2016, Knee surgery & related research.

[16]  N. Adachi,et al.  Revision single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with over-the-top route procedure. , 2015, Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR.

[17]  D. E. Cooper,et al.  Effect of Graft Choice on the Outcome of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) Cohort , 2014, The American journal of sports medicine.

[18]  Freddie H. Fu,et al.  A comparison of dynamic rotational knee instability between anatomic single-bundle and over-the-top anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using triaxial accelerometry , 2014, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[19]  L. Huston,et al.  Differences in Mechanisms of Failure, Intraoperative Findings, and Surgical Characteristics Between Single- and Multiple-Revision ACL Reconstructions , 2013, The American journal of sports medicine.

[20]  D. Dahm,et al.  Outcomes of Repeat Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction , 2013, The American journal of sports medicine.

[21]  S. Giannini,et al.  Allograft Salvage Procedure in Multiple-Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction , 2013, The American journal of sports medicine.

[22]  Michael J Stuart,et al.  Femoral Tunnel Malposition in ACL Revision Reconstruction , 2012, The Journal of Knee Surgery.

[23]  Ling Chen,et al.  Outcome of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. , 2012, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[24]  Freddie H. Fu,et al.  A biomechanical comparison of 2 femoral fixation techniques for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in skeletally immature patients: over-the-top fixation versus transphyseal technique. , 2011, Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association.

[25]  D. E. Cooper,et al.  Descriptive Epidemiology of the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) Cohort , 2010, The American journal of sports medicine.

[26]  B. Moyen,et al.  Repeat Revision of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction , 2009, The American journal of sports medicine.

[27]  J. Menetrey,et al.  “Biological failure” of the anterior cruciate ligament graft , 2008, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.