ALL Reconstruction Versus Modified Lemaire's LET in Combination With ACL Reconstruction With a Minimum Follow up of 2 Years

Overview

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears are associated with concomitant lesions of the anterolateral ligament (ALL), which increase rotatory instability of the knee. If untreated, ALL insufficiency can compromise the results of ACL reconstruction, with higher risk of iterative ACL tear or additional meniscal lesion. Several surgical techniques have been described to reconstruct the ALL. Indications are increasingly frequent and actually, consensus being young patients, patients practising pivot sports, significant rotational laxity on clinical examination with a positive pivot shift test, or in cases of iterative surgery. To date, the two most popular techniques are the Lemaire technique (use of a fascia lata strip) and LAL reconstruction plasty (use of part of an accessory hamstring tendon). The older Lemaire procedure, popularized in the 1980s has proved its efficiency in terms of biomechanics, safety and reproducibility. More recently, following a new, precise anatomical description, anterolateral ligament plasty (ALL) has been developed, which is intended to be more anatomical than Lemaire's technique, but whose clinical superiority has not yet been demonstrated. Both techniques are currently used in our department, with the choice of technique left to the surgeon's discretion. To date, no randomized prospective study has demonstrated the clinical superiority of one technique over the other with a long term follow up. The aim of this study was to compare graft survival of ALL reconstruction versus modified Lemaire LET in combination with ACL reconstruction with a minimum follow up of 2 years. Secondary aim was to compare functional outcomes between both groups.