Graft failure after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, particularly with hamstring autograft in young pivoting athletes, has driven renewed interest in supplementing the intra-articular graft with a lateral extra-articular procedure — either anterolateral ligament reconstruction or lateral extra-articular tenodesis.
This meta-analysis pooled 12 level I and II randomised trials covering 1,327 skeletally mature patients randomised to primary ACL reconstruction with or without a lateral procedure, excluding studies with less than nine months of follow-up. Seven studies used anterolateral ligament reconstruction and five used lateral extra-articular tenodesis.
Graft failure was significantly reduced with the addition of a lateral procedure (95% CI 0.235 to 0.580, p<0.001), as was persistent positive pivot shift (0.324 to 0.703, p<0.001). Lysholm scores favoured the addition (0.779 to 3.093, p=0.001), while International Knee Documentation Committee scores (-0.521 to 3.757, p=0.138) and Tegner scores (-0.304 to 0.222, p=0.760) showed no difference.
The authors then do something unusually useful: they test for ceiling effects in the patient-reported measures, and find significant ceiling effects in three of four studies reporting IKDC scores and in every study reporting Lysholm. That means the null IKDC result may reflect the instrument saturating rather than the procedures being equivalent.
So the objective outcomes — graft failure and pivot shift — improved, and the subjective ones cannot resolve a difference because most patients score at the top of the scale. For a young pivoting athlete facing a hamstring autograft reconstruction, that is a reasonable basis for offering the addition.
- Consider adding a lateral extra-articular procedure to primary ACL reconstruction, particularly with hamstring autograft in pivoting athletes
- Expect reduced graft failure and less persistent positive pivot shift
- Do not read the null IKDC and Tegner results as equivalence — both instruments showed ceiling effects
- Both anterolateral ligament reconstruction and lateral extra-articular tenodesis were represented; the analysis does not separate them
- Discuss the added operative time and the additional incision with the patient
The statistics, in plain English
A ceiling effect means most patients score at or near the maximum on a questionnaire, so the instrument cannot detect further improvement and any comparison using it is biased towards showing no difference. The authors found this in every study reporting Lysholm and in three of four reporting IKDC, using a 15% threshold — which makes the negative IKDC result uninterpretable rather than reassuring. This is why objective outcomes matter in surgical trials: graft failure and pivot shift have no ceiling. Note that the effect estimates are reported here as confidence intervals without their point estimates, so the direction and significance are clear but the magnitude is not.
Read the rest in the app
You have read your two free briefings this month. The app carries all 27 specialties, every morning, free — and this finding is waiting in it.
Scan to keep reading on your phone. No account needed to start.
Tomorrow morning, before your first patient
One edition a day for orthopaedics, written by the desk, every claim tied to its paper. Six minutes.
Get the app — free