STRIKERS Elite Sports Group · School of Medicine, University of St Andrews

Clinical, Functional
and Sport-Related
Outcomes After ACL Reconstruction

Analysis of 512 consecutive patients undergoing primary ACL reconstruction at the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, with minimum 24-month follow-up.

R Cullinan · L Baxendale-Smith · T Williamson · E Sutherland · L Watson
N D Clement · I R Murray · T O White · P Walmsley · A J Hall
EKAD Project Group: I Daniels · F Dyer · K Milne · J M Leow · S Silvestre · G Snowden · R Webb
View results →
ACL knee anatomy
512Patients
29.2Mean age (yrs)
71.9%Male
47moMean follow-up
17.6%Further surgery
6.3%Revision ACLr
Collaborative institutions and partners
Collaborative institutions and partners
Results · Further Surgery

Approximately one in six needed further surgery

90 of 512 patients (17.6%) underwent further ipsilateral knee surgery. Mean time to further surgery: 15.5 months (range 2–55).

512 primary ACLr patients
422 — no further surgery (82.4%)
90 (17.6%)
Breakdown of the 90 further procedures

Hover or tap a bar to see details.

Authors R Cullinan · L Baxendale-Smith · T Williamson · E Sutherland · L Watson · N D Clement · I R Murray · T O White · P Walmsley · A J Hall EKAD Project Group: I Daniels · F Dyer · K Milne · J M Leow · S Silvestre · G Snowden · R Webb  ·  Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh · School of Medicine, University of St Andrews
Results · Further Surgery

Approximately one in six
needed further surgery

90 of 512 patients (17.6%) underwent further ipsilateral knee surgery following primary ACL reconstruction. Mean time to further surgery was 15.5 months (range 2–55 months).

Further surgery rate
17.6%
90 of 512 patients
Mean time: 15.5 months
Revision ACLr for re-rupture
6.3%
32 of 512 patients
Median time to recurrence: 14 months
Further proceduren
Revision ACL reconstruction32
Arthrolysis25
Meniscectomy18
Surgical washout6
Osteochondral procedure4
Other5
Results · Risk Factors

No association with age, sex,
mechanism, or procedure

After adjustment for confounders, no independent variable was associated with reoperation (p ≥ 0.082) or revision ACL reconstruction (p ≥ 0.161).

FactorEffect estimate (95% CI)p
Age at index surgeryDiff −0.3 (−2.54 to 1.88)0.771NS
SexOR 0.90 (0.54 to 1.47)0.330NS
Mechanism of index injury—0.289NS
Concurrent injury at presentationOR 1.91 (0.80 to 4.50)0.135NS
Patient-Reported Outcomes

High satisfaction and good function —
but a substantial wider burden

268 of 512 patients completed the survey (52%). Mean follow-up at time of PROMs collection: 47 months.

8/10
Satisfaction
SD 2.2 · 0 worst, 10 best
80
IKDC score
SD 16.5 · good knee function
9/10
Net promoter score
SD 1.8 · likely to recommend
64%
Negative effect on quality of life (severe in 17.5%)
40%
Negative effect on work (90% needed sick leave, median 7.4 wks)
25%
Negative effect on relationships (severe in 4.9%)
Return to play
Median return to play
52 wks
IQR 44 weeks
Did not return within 4 years
31%
81 of 261 patients
Most common pre-injury sports
Football 135 Golf 92 Gym / fitness 71 Running 50 Rugby 47
Conclusions

What this means for
patients and clinicians

Presentation

Conference Slides

Full presentation deck — 15 slides. Tap to view inline or download the PPTX.

15 slides
Slide 1 / 15
Slide 1
Slide 2 / 15
Slide 2
Slide 3 / 15
Slide 3
Slide 4 / 15
Slide 4
Slide 5 / 15
Slide 5
Slide 6 / 15
Slide 6
Slide 7 / 15
Slide 7
Slide 8 / 15
Slide 8
Slide 9 / 15
Slide 9
Slide 10 / 15
Slide 10
Slide 11 / 15
Slide 11
Slide 12 / 15
Slide 12
Slide 13 / 15
Slide 13
Slide 14 / 15
Slide 14
Slide 15 / 15
Slide 15
This study

Share or get in touch

Questions about this study, collaboration enquiries, or to share this page with a colleague.

QR code for this study page
Scan to share
✉ Email in LinkedIn