Clinical and functional outcomes 2 years after ACL repair and InternalBraceTM ligament augmentation in comparison with ACL reconstruction and healthy controls
PhD Project | 5 Project Members
For patients with proximal anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears, primary ACL repair
with additional suture tape augmentation (ACL-IB, InternalBraceTM) has been introduced as an
alternative procedure to ACL reconstruction (ACL-R). The advantages of ACL repair over
ACL-R include preservation of the native ligament and lack of tendon harvesting. However,
evidence on the outcome of ACL-IB has only started to emerge. First studies on ACL-IB after
proximal ACL tears have reported promising results in patient-reported outcome measures and
in clinical knee examination comparable to ACL-R. Although ACL repair is thought to restore
proprioception and natural knee mechanics, evidence for such functional and biomechanical
benefits in patients after ACL-IB is limited or absent in the literature. In addition, there is insufficient
information on the extent of potential limitations after ACL-IB compared to healthy
subjects. Knowledge of these aspects is essential to understand the role of ACL-IB alongside
ACL-R and to establish this procedure as an alternative treatment option for proximal ACL
tears in orthopaedic surgery.
The aim of this thesis was to provide evidence on clinical and functional-biomechanical
outcomes 2 years after ACL-IB, and to directly compare these outcomes to sex- and agematched
patients 2 years after ACL-R using hamstring tendon autograft, and sex- and agematched
healthy controls. For this purpose, we assessed our participants in a comprehensive
test protocol, including patient-reported outcome measures and a clinical leg examination (clinical
outcomes); as well as functional tests of leg performance in knee muscle strength, knee
proprioception, dynamic postural control, and single-leg hops; as well as analyses of leg joint
kinematics and kinetics and leg muscle activation during walking and during forward singleleg
hop landing (functional-biomechanical outcomes). The clinical and functional-biomechanical
outcomes were compared between the legs within each group and between the involved
(operated) leg of patients and the non-dominant leg of controls.
Two years after ACL-IB, we found good results in clinical outcomes. Leg asymmetries
remained in performance and knee joint mechanics during single-leg hops. All outcomes were
comparable between ACL-IB and ACL-R. Patients after both ACL-IB and ACL-R did not return
to healthy levels. Compared to controls, they subjectively perceived functional impairments
of their injury, had a reduced quadriceps strength and altered knee biomechanics during
walking. Furthermore, only patients after ACL-IB had different knee mechanics during hop
landing and only patients after ACL-R had different semitendinosus muscle activation during
walking than controls.
Our study demonstrated that 2 years after surgery, patients undergoing less invasive ACLIB
can expect a comparable clinical and functional-biomechanical outcome to that of patients
undergoing ACL-R, without risking comorbidities of graft removal or changes in hamstrings
function. These results support ACL-IB as an alternative surgery to ACL-R for a subset of ACL
patients representing our cohort (i.e., proximal rupture, moderate knee-loading activity level).
In addition, we have shown that even preservation of native ACL fibres does not result in a
healthy clinical and functional-biomechanical outcome level. This suggests that the initial ACL
rupture causes changes that cannot be restored with surgery alone.