TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury
T2 - Panther Symposium ACL Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group
AU - Svantesson, Eleonor
AU - Hamrin Senorski, Eric
AU - Webster, Kate E.
AU - Karlsson, Jón
AU - Diermeier, Theresa
AU - Rothrauff, Benjamin B.
AU - Meredith, Sean J.
AU - Rauer, Thomas
AU - Irrgang, James J.
AU - Spindler, Kurt P.
AU - Ma, C. Benjamin
AU - Musahl, Volker
AU - the Panther Symposium ACL Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group, Panther Symposium ACL Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group
AU - Fu, Freddie H.
AU - Ayeni, Olufemi R.
AU - Della Villa, Francesco
AU - Della Villa, Stefano
AU - Dye, Scott
AU - Ferretti, Mario
AU - Getgood, Alan
AU - Järvelä, Timo
AU - Kaeding, Christopher C.
AU - Kuroda, Ryosuke
AU - Lesniak, Bryson
AU - Marx, Robert G.
AU - Maletis, Gregory B.
AU - Pinczewski, Leo
AU - Ranawat, Anil
AU - Reider, Bruce
AU - Seil, Romain
AU - van Eck, Carola
AU - Wolf, Brian R.
AU - Yung, Patrick
AU - Zaffagnini, Stefano
AU - Hao Zheng, Ming
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2020.
PY - 2020/7/1
Y1 - 2020/7/1
N2 - A stringent outcome assessment is a key aspect of establishing evidence-based clinical guidelines for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury treatment. To establish a standardized assessment of clinical outcome after ACL treatment, a consensus meeting including a multidisciplinary group of ACL experts was held at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, in June 2019. The aim was to establish a consensus on what data should be reported when conducting an ACL outcome study, what specific outcome measurements should be used, and at what follow-up time those outcomes should be assessed. The group reached consensus on 9 statements by using a modified Delphi method. In general, outcomes after ACL treatment can be divided into 4 robust categories: early adverse events, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), ACL graft failure/recurrent ligament disruption, and clinical measures of knee function and structure. A comprehensive assessment after ACL treatment should aim to provide a complete overview of the treatment result, optimally including the various aspects of outcome categories. For most research questions, a minimum follow-up of 2 years with an optimal follow-up rate of 80% is necessary to achieve a comprehensive assessment. This should include clinical examination, any sustained reinjuries, validated knee-specific PROs, and health-related quality of life questionnaires. In the midterm to long-term follow-up, the presence of osteoarthritis should be evaluated. This consensus paper provides practical guidelines for how the aforementioned entities of outcomes should be reported and suggests the preferred tools for a reliable and valid assessment of outcome after ACL treatment.
AB - A stringent outcome assessment is a key aspect of establishing evidence-based clinical guidelines for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury treatment. To establish a standardized assessment of clinical outcome after ACL treatment, a consensus meeting including a multidisciplinary group of ACL experts was held at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, in June 2019. The aim was to establish a consensus on what data should be reported when conducting an ACL outcome study, what specific outcome measurements should be used, and at what follow-up time those outcomes should be assessed. The group reached consensus on 9 statements by using a modified Delphi method. In general, outcomes after ACL treatment can be divided into 4 robust categories: early adverse events, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), ACL graft failure/recurrent ligament disruption, and clinical measures of knee function and structure. A comprehensive assessment after ACL treatment should aim to provide a complete overview of the treatment result, optimally including the various aspects of outcome categories. For most research questions, a minimum follow-up of 2 years with an optimal follow-up rate of 80% is necessary to achieve a comprehensive assessment. This should include clinical examination, any sustained reinjuries, validated knee-specific PROs, and health-related quality of life questionnaires. In the midterm to long-term follow-up, the presence of osteoarthritis should be evaluated. This consensus paper provides practical guidelines for how the aforementioned entities of outcomes should be reported and suggests the preferred tools for a reliable and valid assessment of outcome after ACL treatment.
KW - consensus statement
KW - laxity
KW - osteoarthritis
KW - patient-reported outcome
KW - reconstruction
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85088373251&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/2325967120934751
DO - 10.1177/2325967120934751
M3 - Article
C2 - 32767052
AN - SCOPUS:85088373251
SN - 2325-9671
VL - 8
JO - Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
JF - Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
IS - 7
ER -