Cargando…

Subjective Outcomes After Allograft Reconstruction and Nonoperative Treatment of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Ruptures Are Similar in Patients Aged 40 Years and Older: A 2:1 Propensity Score–Matched Analysis

PURPOSE: To compare subjective outcomes and rates of subsequent operations for patients aged 40 years and older with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures who elected nonoperative management or allograft ACL reconstruction (ACLR). METHODS: This was a retrospective study comparing 2-year minimum...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hayes-Lattin, Madison, Sylvia, Stephen M., Bragg, Jack T., Puzzitiello, Richard N., Richmond, John C., Salzler, Matthew J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10300546/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37388898
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2023.03.005
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: To compare subjective outcomes and rates of subsequent operations for patients aged 40 years and older with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures who elected nonoperative management or allograft ACL reconstruction (ACLR). METHODS: This was a retrospective study comparing 2-year minimum results of nonoperative treatment and primary allograft ACLR among patients aged 40 years and older presenting to a single institution between the years 2005 and 2016. Patients who elected nonoperative management were 2:1 propensity score (PS)-matched to patients who elected ACLR based on age, sex, body mass index, sports-related mechanism of injury, Outerbridge grade III or IV chondral lesions, and medial or lateral meniscus tears. Univariate analysis was performed to compare subjective outcome measures of International Knee Documentation Committee and Marx activity level scores, subsequent operations, and satisfaction rates. RESULTS: After 2:1 PS matching, 40 ACLR and 20 nonoperative patients with mean ages of 52.2 years and 54.5 years, respectively, were included with a mean follow-up of 5.7 years (SD 2.1 years, range 2.3-10.6 years). There were no significant differences between the groups in any of the matching variables. There were no significant differences in International Knee Documentation Committee scores (81.9 ± 14.1, CI 77.4-86.5 vs 84.3 ± 12.8, CI 78.3-90.3, P = .53), Marx activity level scores (5.8 ± 4.8, CI 4.2-7.3 vs 5.7 ± 5.1, CI 3.3-8.1, P = .96), or satisfaction rates (100% vs 90%, P = .11) between the ACLR and nonoperative groups. Four (10%) patients who underwent ACLR sustained a graft treated with revision ACLR. 7 (17.5%) ACLR and 0 nonoperative patients subsequently received further ipsilateral knee surgeries (P = .08), including 2 total knee arthroplasties. CONCLUSIONS: In this PS-matched analysis of patients aged 40 years and older with ACL ruptures, patients who elected nonoperative management had similar subjective outcomes compared with those who elected allograft ACLR. Patients who elected allograft ACLR did not have fewer subsequent operations than those who elected nonoperative treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.