You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • Factors that affect patient reported outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction–a systematic review of the Scandinavian knee ligament registers

Article Text

Article menu

other Versions

Download PDFPDF
Review
Factors that affect patient reported outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction–a systematic review of the Scandinavian knee ligament registers
  1. Eric Hamrin Senorski1,
  2. Eleonor Svantesson2,
  3. Angelo Baldari3,
  4. Olufemi R Ayeni4,
  5. Lars Engebretsen5,6,
  6. Francesco Franceschi3,
  7. Jón Karlsson2,7,
  8. Kristian Samuelsson2,7
  1. 1 Department of Health and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Goteborg, Sweden
  2. 2 Department of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Goteborg, Sweden
  3. 3 Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Campus Bio-Medico University of Rome, Rome, Italy
  4. 4 Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  5. 5 Oslo University Hospital and University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
  6. 6 Oslo Sports Trauma Research Centre, The Norwegian School of Sports Sciences, Oslo, Norway
  7. 7 Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden
  1. Correspondence to Dr. Eric Hamrin Senorski, Department of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg SE-431 80, Sweden; eric.hamrin.senorski{at}gu.se

Abstract

Objective To perform a systematic review of findings from the Scandinavian knee ligament registers with regard to factors that affect patient reported outcome after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

Design Systematic review.

Data sources Four electronic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and AMED were searched, and 157 studies were identified. Two reviewers independently screened the titles, abstracts and full text articles for eligibility. A modified version of the Downs and Black checklist was applied for quality appraisal.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Studies published from the Scandinavian registers from their establishment in 2004 and onwards that documented patient reported outcome and provided information on concomitant injuries were eligible.

Results A total of 35 studies were included. Younger age at ACL reconstruction, male sex, not smoking and receiving a hamstring tendon autograft positively influenced patient reported outcome. Patients with concomitant cartilage and meniscal injuries reported inferior subjective knee function compared with patients with an isolated ACL tear. One study reported that patients treated non-reconstructively reported inferior knee function compared with patients who had ACL reconstruction.

Conclusion Younger age, male sex, not smoking, receiving a hamstring tendon autograft and the absence of concomitant injuries were associated with superior patient reported outcomes after ACL reconstruction.

  • acl
  • knee acl
  • anterior cruciate ligament
  • review

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2017-098191

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors EHS, ES and KS contributed substantially to the acquisition of the data, analysis of the data and are responsible for drafting the work and revising it critically for important intellectual content. AB, FF and ORA made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work, including interpretation of the data. LE and JK made large contributions to the revision and design of the manuscript. All authors have given their final approval of the manuscript to be published. In addition, all authors are in agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient consent Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.