A systematic review of long-term patient reported outcomes for the treatment of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in the skeletally immature

PURPOSE: To systematically review the available literature regarding outcomes for the treatment of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries in the skeletally immature at skeletal maturity or more than five years after surgery. METHODS: A systematic search was performed of seven online databases for literature reporting patient reported outcomes for the treatment of ACL injuries in the skeletally immature. A systematic review of this literature was performed examining the outcomes and their association with skeletal immaturity and treatment techniques. RESULTS: A total of 18 articles reported the outcomes of 425 subjects. The mean age at surgery ranged from 10.3 to 15 years. Mean follow-up ranged from 36 to 163 months. Ten studies followed up subjects until skeletal maturity. Mean outcome scores were similar for extraphyseal (Lysholm 96.2 (95.7 to 97.4), Tegner 6.75, IKDC 95.4 (94 to 100)) and transphyseal surgery (Lysholm 94.3 (84.6-100), Tegner 7.6 (6 to 8.7), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) 93.6 (84 to 99)). However, the lower range boundary for Lysholm and IKDC was worse for the transphyseal group. The results for non-surgical treatments were worse (Lysholm 63.2, Tegner 4.8, IKDC 87). No significant differences were found in the incidence of limb-length discrepancy (p = 0.32), coronal plane growth disturbance (p = 0.48), graft rupture (p = 0.88) and persistent symptomatic instability (p = 0.11) with transphyseal and extraphyseal surgical techniques. CONCLUSION: Both transphyseal and extraphyseal reconstructive techniques produced good patient reported outcomes, with no significant differences in the incidence of limb-length discrepancy, coronal plane growth disturbance, graft rupture and persistent symptomatic instability. They compare favourably with the repair techniques reviewed and the natural history of the condition. Further high-quality studies comparing the transphyseal and extraphyseal techniques are required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV