Search Filters

  • Media Source
  • Presentation Format
  • Media Type
  • Media Year
  • Language
  • Diagnosis / Condition
  • Diagnosis Method
  • Patient Populations
  • Treatment / Technique

Outcomes After Operative and Nonoperative Treatment of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Ruptures in Patients Aged 40 and Older: A 2:1 Propensity Score Matched Analysis

Outcomes After Operative and Nonoperative Treatment of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Ruptures in Patients Aged 40 and Older: A 2:1 Propensity Score Matched Analysis

Richard Puzzitiello, MD, UNITED STATES Madison Hayes-Lattin, BS, UNITED STATES Jack Bragg, MD, UNITED STATES Stephen Sylvia, MD, UNITED STATES Matthew Salzler, MD, UNITED STATES

Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, UNITED STATES


2023 Congress   ePoster Presentation   2023 Congress   rating (1)

 

Diagnosis / Condition

Anatomic Location

Anatomic Structure

Ligaments

ACL


Summary: There exists no guidelines on the management of ACL ruptures in patients over 40, in a propensity score analysis we found that patients who elected for nonoperative management had similar subjective outcomes compared to those who opted for primary allograft ACLR.


Purpose

To compare the subjective outcomes and rates of subsequent operations for patients aged 40 and older with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures who elected nonoperative management or primary allograft ACL reconstruction (ACLR).

Methods

This was a retrospective study comparing the 2-year minimum results of nonoperative treatment and primary allograft ACLR among patients aged 40 and older presenting to a single institution between the years of 2005 and 2016. Patients who elected nonoperative management were 2:1 propensity score (PS) matched to patients who elected ACLR on the basis of age, sex, BMI, sports related mechanism of injury, Outerbridge grade III or IV chondral lesions, and medial or lateral meniscus tears. Univariate analysis was performed to compare subsequent operations, IKDC scores, Marx activity level scores, and satisfaction rates between the matched ACLR and nonoperative groups.

Results

After 2:1 PS matching, 40 ACLR and 20 nonoperative patients were included with a mean follow-up of 5.7 years (SD 2.1 years, range 2.3 – 10.6 years). There were no significant differences between the groups in any of the matching variables. Four (10%) ACLR patients sustained a graft re-rupture treated with revision ACLR. Additionally, 7 (17.5%) ACLR and 0 nonoperative patients subsequently received further ipsilateral knee surgeries (P=0.08), including 2 total knee arthroplasties. There were no significant differences in postoperative IKDC scores (81.9±14.1 vs. 84.3±12.8, P=0.53), Marx activity level scores (5.8±4.8 vs. 5.7±5.1, P=0.96), or satisfaction rates (100% vs. 90%, P=0.11) between the ACLR and nonoperative groups.

Conclusion

In this PS matched analysis of patients aged 40 and older with ACL ruptures, patients who elected nonoperative management had similar subjective outcomes compared to those who elected primary allograft ACLR.


More 2023 ISAKOS Congress Content