[Comparison of anterior lateral ligament reconstruction and anterior lateral complex repair in the treatment of anterior cruciate ligament combined with anterior lateral ligament injury with high-grade pivot shift].

OBJECTIVE

To retrospectively analyze the clinical efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction combined with anterolateral complex repair and ACL reconstruction combined with ALL reconstruction in the treatment of anterior cruciate ligament injuries with high-grade pivot shift.

METHODS

From January 2018 to June 2022, 49 patients combined ACL and ALL injuries with high-grade pivot shift were retrospectively studied from three hospitals, 29 of them underwent ACL reconstruction with anterolateral complex repair (repair group), including 23 males and 6 females with an average age of (27.5±4.8) years old, ranged from 20 to 37 years old;the injured sides were 13 on the left and 16 on the right, and 11 patients were suffered with meniscus injury. The other 20 patients underwent ACL and ALL reconstruction (reconstruction group) including 17 males and 3 females with the mean age of (27.1±4.5) years old, ranged from 20 to 38 years old;the injured sides were 8 on the left and 12 on the right, and 6 patients were suffered with meniscus injury. Knee stability (pivot shift test, KT-2000), range of motion, knee function (Lysholm scoring scale, Cincinnati sports activity scale (CSAS) scoring scale, and Tegner activity level score between two groups were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 49 patients were followed up, the repair group receiving 13 to 20(15.3±1.8) months and the reconstruction group receiving 12 to 21(16.0±2.2) months. There was no statistically significant difference in the preoperative pivot shift test grading distribution between two groups (>0.05). At the last postoperative follow-up, there were 24 patients with grade 0 and 5 patients with grade 1 in the repair group, and there were 18 patients with grade 0 and 2 patients with grade 1 in the reconstruction group, there is no significant difference in the distribution of axial shift test grading between two groups(>0.05). The preoperative KT-2000 tibial displacement of two groups were (9.39±0.77) mm (repair group) and (9.14±0.78) mm (reconstruction group) respectively, with no statistically significant difference (>0.05). At the final postoperative follow-up, there were 24 patients with KT-2000 tibial displacement <3 mm and 5 patients with 3 to 5 mm in the repair group, while 18 patients with <3 mm and 2 patients with 3 to 5 mm in the reconstruction group, KT-2000 tibial displacement distribution of two groups was no significant difference (>0.05), but the KT-2000 tibial displacement in the reconstruction group (1.30±0.86) mm was significantly smaller than that in the repair group (1.99±1.11) mm (<0.05). The final postoperative follow-up range of motion of the contralateral side knee between two groups was no significant difference (>0.05). The range of motion of the suffering knee in the repair group was less than that in the reconstruction group (<0.05). There was no significant difference in preoperative Lysholm and CSAS scores between two groups (>0.05). At the final postoperative follow-up, both groups showed significant improvement in Lysholm and CSAS scores, while the Lysholm and CSAS scores of the reconstruction group were better than those of the repair group, and the difference was statistically significant (<0.05). Significant differences was found in Tegner scores between two groups, which 16 patients in the repair group returned to their pre-injury activity level, and 17 patients in the reconstruction group returned to their pre-injury level (<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Compared to anterolateral complex repair, combined ACL and ALL reconstruction in the treatment of ACL injuries with high-grade pivot shift results in better knee joint function and stability. This is advantageous in reducing the risk of ACL reconstruction failure.