Current development in surgical techniques, graft selection and additional procedures for anterior cruciate ligament injury: a path towards anatomic restoration and improved clinical outcomes-a narrative review.

BACKGROUND AND

OBJECTIVE

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has been widely used for ACL injury for a long time. However, residual rotational instability and osteoarthritic changes after ACL reconstruction have been identified as problems. Thus, anatomic reconstruction techniques, various types of grafts and additional procedures have been desired to improve the clinical outcomes and knee instability. Although clinical outcomes and knee stability are better than in the past, ipsilateral graft failures still occur in 4-17% and osteoarthritic changes are seen in about 20% of patients after ACL reconstruction. To remedy these problems, it is necessary to improve the understanding of various surgical techniques and grafts and to pursue further improvement of surgical techniques. Therefore, the objective of this review is to summarize the advantages and disadvantages of various surgical techniques and graft selection, and additional procedures for ACL injury.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted on the surgical procedures for ACL injury. Recent trends in surgical techniques, graft selection, and additional procedures for ACL injury were described. We performed a literature search in PubMed for studies published from origin to May 8, 2023. Studies were required to be English-language articles.

KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: Although many reports indicate that double-bundle ACL reconstruction is comparable to anatomic single-bundle (SB) reconstruction, intraoperative complications such as tunnel coalition exist in double-bundle reconstruction, and the technique needs to be improved. ACL repair has shown good short-term results, but long-term results need to be examined in the future. Quadriceps tendon autograft is being used more frequently, but hamstrings tendon autograft and bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft also have good results. In addition, in higher-risk cases, lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction can be performed with good results.

CONCLUSIONS

To further improve clinical outcomes, more anatomical reconstructions should be pursued. Autografts are better than allografts and synthetic grafts, but further study is needed to determine which graft is better. Additional procedures should be performed in highly unstable cases and in revision cases.