Clinical outcome of primary medial collateral ligament-posteromedial corner repair with or without staged anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Vivek Pandey, Vikrant Khanna, Sandesh Madi, Anshul Tripathi, Kiran Acharya

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Introduction Medial collateral ligament (MCL) is a prime valgus stabilizer of the knee, and MCL tears are currently managed conservatively. However, posteromedial corner (PMC) injury along with MCL tear is not same as isolated MCL tear and the former is more serious injury and requires operative attention. However, literature is scarce about the management and outcome of PMC-MCL tear alongside anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear. The purpose of this study is to report the clinical outcome of primary repair of MCL and PMC with or without staged ACL reconstruction. Methods A retrospective evaluation was performed on patients with MCL-PMC complex injury with ACL tear who underwent primary repair of MCL-PMC tear followed by rehabilitation. Further, several of them chose to undergo ACL reconstruction whereas rest opted conservative treatment for the ACL tear. A total of 35 patients of two groups [Group 1 (n = 15): MCL-PMC repaired and ACL conserved; Group 2 (n = 20): MCL-PMC repaired and ACL reconstructed] met the inclusion criteria with a minimum follow-up of two years. Clinical outcome measures included grade of valgus medial opening (0° extension and 30° flexion), Lysholm and International knee documentation committee (IKDC) scores, KT-1000 measurement, subjective feeling of instability, range of motion (ROM) assessment and complications. Results While comparing group 2 versus group 1, mean Lysholm (94.6 vs. 91.06; p = 0.017) and IKDC scores (86.3 vs. 77.6; p = 0.011) of group 2 were significantly higher than group 1. 60% patients of group 1 complained of instability against none in the group 2 (p < 0.0001). All the knees of both the groups were valgus stable with none requiring late reconstruction. The mean loss of flexion ROM in group 1 and 2 was 12° and 9° respectively which was not statistically different (p = 0.41). However while considering the loss of motion, two groups did not show any significant difference in clinical scores. Conclusions Primary MCL-PMC repair renders the knee stable in coronal plane in both the groups and further ACL reconstruction adds on to the stability of the knee providing a superior clinical outcome. Minor knee stiffness remains a concern after primary MCL-PMC repair but without any unfavorable clinical effect.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1236-1242
Number of pages7
JournalInjury
Volume48
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-06-2017

Fingerprint

Collateral Ligaments
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
Knee
Tears
Anterior Cruciate Ligament
Articular Range of Motion
Documentation
Knee Medial Collateral Ligament
Wounds and Injuries
Emotions
Rehabilitation
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Emergency Medicine
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

@article{4b5cba513ad946e3981d6e9f37e035df,
title = "Clinical outcome of primary medial collateral ligament-posteromedial corner repair with or without staged anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction",
abstract = "Introduction Medial collateral ligament (MCL) is a prime valgus stabilizer of the knee, and MCL tears are currently managed conservatively. However, posteromedial corner (PMC) injury along with MCL tear is not same as isolated MCL tear and the former is more serious injury and requires operative attention. However, literature is scarce about the management and outcome of PMC-MCL tear alongside anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear. The purpose of this study is to report the clinical outcome of primary repair of MCL and PMC with or without staged ACL reconstruction. Methods A retrospective evaluation was performed on patients with MCL-PMC complex injury with ACL tear who underwent primary repair of MCL-PMC tear followed by rehabilitation. Further, several of them chose to undergo ACL reconstruction whereas rest opted conservative treatment for the ACL tear. A total of 35 patients of two groups [Group 1 (n = 15): MCL-PMC repaired and ACL conserved; Group 2 (n = 20): MCL-PMC repaired and ACL reconstructed] met the inclusion criteria with a minimum follow-up of two years. Clinical outcome measures included grade of valgus medial opening (0° extension and 30° flexion), Lysholm and International knee documentation committee (IKDC) scores, KT-1000 measurement, subjective feeling of instability, range of motion (ROM) assessment and complications. Results While comparing group 2 versus group 1, mean Lysholm (94.6 vs. 91.06; p = 0.017) and IKDC scores (86.3 vs. 77.6; p = 0.011) of group 2 were significantly higher than group 1. 60{\%} patients of group 1 complained of instability against none in the group 2 (p < 0.0001). All the knees of both the groups were valgus stable with none requiring late reconstruction. The mean loss of flexion ROM in group 1 and 2 was 12° and 9° respectively which was not statistically different (p = 0.41). However while considering the loss of motion, two groups did not show any significant difference in clinical scores. Conclusions Primary MCL-PMC repair renders the knee stable in coronal plane in both the groups and further ACL reconstruction adds on to the stability of the knee providing a superior clinical outcome. Minor knee stiffness remains a concern after primary MCL-PMC repair but without any unfavorable clinical effect.",
author = "Vivek Pandey and Vikrant Khanna and Sandesh Madi and Anshul Tripathi and Kiran Acharya",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.injury.2017.03.021",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "1236--1242",
journal = "Injury",
issn = "0020-1383",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "6",

}

Clinical outcome of primary medial collateral ligament-posteromedial corner repair with or without staged anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. / Pandey, Vivek; Khanna, Vikrant; Madi, Sandesh; Tripathi, Anshul; Acharya, Kiran.

In: Injury, Vol. 48, No. 6, 01.06.2017, p. 1236-1242.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinical outcome of primary medial collateral ligament-posteromedial corner repair with or without staged anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

AU - Pandey, Vivek

AU - Khanna, Vikrant

AU - Madi, Sandesh

AU - Tripathi, Anshul

AU - Acharya, Kiran

PY - 2017/6/1

Y1 - 2017/6/1

N2 - Introduction Medial collateral ligament (MCL) is a prime valgus stabilizer of the knee, and MCL tears are currently managed conservatively. However, posteromedial corner (PMC) injury along with MCL tear is not same as isolated MCL tear and the former is more serious injury and requires operative attention. However, literature is scarce about the management and outcome of PMC-MCL tear alongside anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear. The purpose of this study is to report the clinical outcome of primary repair of MCL and PMC with or without staged ACL reconstruction. Methods A retrospective evaluation was performed on patients with MCL-PMC complex injury with ACL tear who underwent primary repair of MCL-PMC tear followed by rehabilitation. Further, several of them chose to undergo ACL reconstruction whereas rest opted conservative treatment for the ACL tear. A total of 35 patients of two groups [Group 1 (n = 15): MCL-PMC repaired and ACL conserved; Group 2 (n = 20): MCL-PMC repaired and ACL reconstructed] met the inclusion criteria with a minimum follow-up of two years. Clinical outcome measures included grade of valgus medial opening (0° extension and 30° flexion), Lysholm and International knee documentation committee (IKDC) scores, KT-1000 measurement, subjective feeling of instability, range of motion (ROM) assessment and complications. Results While comparing group 2 versus group 1, mean Lysholm (94.6 vs. 91.06; p = 0.017) and IKDC scores (86.3 vs. 77.6; p = 0.011) of group 2 were significantly higher than group 1. 60% patients of group 1 complained of instability against none in the group 2 (p < 0.0001). All the knees of both the groups were valgus stable with none requiring late reconstruction. The mean loss of flexion ROM in group 1 and 2 was 12° and 9° respectively which was not statistically different (p = 0.41). However while considering the loss of motion, two groups did not show any significant difference in clinical scores. Conclusions Primary MCL-PMC repair renders the knee stable in coronal plane in both the groups and further ACL reconstruction adds on to the stability of the knee providing a superior clinical outcome. Minor knee stiffness remains a concern after primary MCL-PMC repair but without any unfavorable clinical effect.

AB - Introduction Medial collateral ligament (MCL) is a prime valgus stabilizer of the knee, and MCL tears are currently managed conservatively. However, posteromedial corner (PMC) injury along with MCL tear is not same as isolated MCL tear and the former is more serious injury and requires operative attention. However, literature is scarce about the management and outcome of PMC-MCL tear alongside anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear. The purpose of this study is to report the clinical outcome of primary repair of MCL and PMC with or without staged ACL reconstruction. Methods A retrospective evaluation was performed on patients with MCL-PMC complex injury with ACL tear who underwent primary repair of MCL-PMC tear followed by rehabilitation. Further, several of them chose to undergo ACL reconstruction whereas rest opted conservative treatment for the ACL tear. A total of 35 patients of two groups [Group 1 (n = 15): MCL-PMC repaired and ACL conserved; Group 2 (n = 20): MCL-PMC repaired and ACL reconstructed] met the inclusion criteria with a minimum follow-up of two years. Clinical outcome measures included grade of valgus medial opening (0° extension and 30° flexion), Lysholm and International knee documentation committee (IKDC) scores, KT-1000 measurement, subjective feeling of instability, range of motion (ROM) assessment and complications. Results While comparing group 2 versus group 1, mean Lysholm (94.6 vs. 91.06; p = 0.017) and IKDC scores (86.3 vs. 77.6; p = 0.011) of group 2 were significantly higher than group 1. 60% patients of group 1 complained of instability against none in the group 2 (p < 0.0001). All the knees of both the groups were valgus stable with none requiring late reconstruction. The mean loss of flexion ROM in group 1 and 2 was 12° and 9° respectively which was not statistically different (p = 0.41). However while considering the loss of motion, two groups did not show any significant difference in clinical scores. Conclusions Primary MCL-PMC repair renders the knee stable in coronal plane in both the groups and further ACL reconstruction adds on to the stability of the knee providing a superior clinical outcome. Minor knee stiffness remains a concern after primary MCL-PMC repair but without any unfavorable clinical effect.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016646987&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85016646987&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.injury.2017.03.021

DO - 10.1016/j.injury.2017.03.021

M3 - Article

VL - 48

SP - 1236

EP - 1242

JO - Injury

JF - Injury

SN - 0020-1383

IS - 6

ER -