Clinical Outcomes in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis

Rohith Mohan, Kate E. Webster, Nick R. Johnson, Michael J. Stuart, Timothy E. Hewett, Aaron J. Krych

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

24 Scopus citations


Purpose: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to determine overall objective graft failure rate, failure rate by graft type (allograft vs autograft reconstruction), instrumented laxity, and patient outcome scores following revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Outcomes of interest were collected for all studies meeting the study inclusion criteria, but lower-level studies (level III/IV) were not pooled for quantitative synthesis due to high levels of heterogeneity in these study populations. Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was performed to identify studies reporting outcomes of revision ACL reconstruction. The primary outcome reported was graft failure. A meta-analysis comparing rate of failure by graft type was conducted using a random effects model. Studies also reported patient clinical outcome scores, including International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm, and knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome scores (KOOS) and graft laxity. Results: Eight studies with 3,021 patients (56% male, 44% female) with an average age of 30 ± 4 years and mean follow-up time of 57 months were included. The overall objective failure rate was 6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8%-12.3%). Mean instrumented laxity as side-to-side difference was 2.5 mm (95% CI, 1.9-3.1 mm). Mean IKDC subjective score was 76.99 (95% CI, 76.64-77.34), mean KOOS symptoms score was 76.73 (95% CI, 75.85-77.61), and mean Lysholm score was 86.18 (95% CI, 79.08-93.28). The proportion of patients with IKDC grade A or B was 85% (95% CI, 77%-91%). When the available data for failure rate were analyzed by graft type, autograft reconstruction had a failure rate of 4.1% (95% CI, 2.0%-6.9%), similar to allograft reconstruction at 3.6% (95% CI, 1.4%-6.7%). Conclusions: In this meta-analysis, revision ACL reconstruction had failure rates similar to autograft or allograft reconstruction. Overall outcome scores for revision reconstruction have improved but appear modest when compared with primary ACL reconstruction surgery. Level of Evidence: Meta-analysis of Level II studies, Level II.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)289-300
Number of pages12
JournalArthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 2018

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical Outcomes in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this