Han Joo Hyung, Kim Sung-Hwan, Jung Min, Moon Hyun-Soo, Chung Kwangho
Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Republic of Korea.
Arthroscopy and Joint Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 03722, Republic of Korea.
J Clin Med. 2025 Mar 25;14(7):2237. doi: 10.3390/jcm14072237.
: The aim of this study is to evaluate the literature for comparing clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with concomitant anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALLR) versus isolated ACLR, with a primary focus on analyzing differences in outcomes based on the type of graft used for ALLR. : We identified comparative studies involving primary ACLR performed in conjunction with ALLR. Graft failure rates, residual pivot shift, residual anterior-posterior (AP) laxity at follow-up, and patient-reported outcome measures were determined. Variables associated with isolated ACLR and ACLR combined with ALLR were compared based on the type of graft used for ALLR. : This systematic review included nine studies involving 2740 patients. Combined ACLR with ALLR using hamstring tendon (HT) autografts or tibialis allografts showed lower graft failure rates than isolated ACLR (HT autograft: rate, 0-5.9%, odds ratio [OR], 2.16-12.91; tibialis allograft: rate, 0%, OR, 2.00-5.27). Similarly, the combined procedure showed reduced residual pivot shift rates (HT autograft: rate, 0-9.1%, OR, 2.00-12.16; tibialis allograft: rate, 0%, OR, 7.65-15.33) compared to isolated ACLR. Residual AP laxity and patient-reported outcomes were similar or more favorable for the combined procedure; however, the results were heterogeneous. Complications related to the type of graft used for ALLR or the presence of ALLR itself were not reported. : Regardless of the graft type used for ALLR, the combination of ACLR with ALLR showed better clinical outcomes, including reduced graft failure rates and superior residual rotational stability compared to isolated ACLR. However, the high heterogeneity observed across studies suggests that these findings should be interpreted with caution, and further research is needed to draw more definitive conclusions.
本研究的目的是评估比较前交叉韧带重建(ACLR)联合前外侧韧带重建(ALLR)与单纯ACLR临床结果的文献,主要侧重于分析基于ALLR所用移植物类型的结果差异。
我们确定了涉及与ALLR联合进行的初次ACLR的比较研究。确定了移植物失败率、残余轴移、随访时残余前后(AP)松弛度以及患者报告的结局指标。根据ALLR所用移植物类型,比较了与单纯ACLR和ACLR联合ALLR相关的变量。
这项系统评价纳入了9项涉及2740例患者的研究。使用腘绳肌腱(HT)自体移植物或胫骨异体移植物进行ACLR联合ALLR显示出比单纯ACLR更低的移植物失败率(HT自体移植物:比率,0 - 5.9%,优势比[OR],2.16 - 12.91;胫骨异体移植物:比率,0%,OR,2.00 - 5.27)。同样,与单纯ACLR相比,联合手术显示残余轴移率降低(HT自体移植物:比率,0 - 9.1%,OR,2.00 - 12.16;胫骨异体移植物:比率,0%,OR,7.65 - 15.33)。联合手术的残余AP松弛度和患者报告的结局相似或更有利;然而,结果存在异质性。未报告与ALLR所用移植物类型或ALLR本身存在相关的并发症。
无论ALLR所用移植物类型如何,ACLR与ALLR联合使用显示出比单纯ACLR更好的临床结果,包括更低的移植物失败率和更好的残余旋转稳定性。然而,研究中观察到的高度异质性表明,这些发现应谨慎解释,需要进一步研究以得出更明确的结论。