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 - Funding Information:
One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: The ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) was sponsored by Smith & Nephew, the UPMC, Elizur, Arthrex, Conmed, DJO, Mid-Atlantic Surgical Systems, RTI Surgical, and BlackRhino Medical. K.S. has received consulting fees from the National Football League, Service Excellence, Mitek, Flexion Therapeutics, Samumed, and NovoPedics and royalties from nPhase. C.B.M. has received consulting fees from Linvatec, Medacta, Stryker, Wright Medical, and Zimmer Biomet. V.M. has received educational grants, consulting fees, and speaking fees from Smith & Nephew and educational grants from Arthrex. O.R.A. has received speaking fees from Conmed and honoraria from DJO. S.D. has received personal fees from Zimmer Biomet. A.G. has received grants and personal fees from Smith & Nephew and Ossur and personal fees from Graymont and Olympus. C.C.K. has received grant support from DJO, educational support from CDC Medical, consulting fees from Zimmer Biomet, and nonconsulting fees from Arthrex. R.K. has received grants from Smith & Nephew, Zimmer Biomet, Stryker, and Johnson & Johnson; consulting fees from Medacta, Arthrex, Japan Tissue Engineering, and Hirosaki Life Science Innovation; and speaking fees from Arthrex, Smith & Nephew, Zimmer Biomet, Johnson & Johnson, and Japan Tissue Engineering. B.L. has received royalties from Wolters Kluwer Health–Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. R.G.M. has received stock/stock options from MEND Nutrition and royalties from Springer and Demos Health. L.P. has received research support from the Australian Orthopaedic Association, Friends of the Mater Foundation, and Smith & Nephew; has received speaking fees from Smith & Nephew; has received royalties from Australian Biotechnologies and Signature Orthopaedics; has stock/stock options in Australian Biotechnologies; and has patents with Hip Developments, Smith & Nephew, and Surgical Apps. A.R. has received other support from Enhatch, Conformis, Stryker, Smith & Nephew, Arthrex, Anika Therapeutics, and Bodycad. B.R. has received fellowship support from Smith & Nephew, has received royalties from Elsevier, has stock in Johnson & Johnson and Merck, and is the Editor-in-Chief of The Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. B.R.W. has received educational support from Wardlow Enterprises, consulting fees from Linvatec, and faculty/speaking fees from Linvatec. M.Z. is the founder of and has stock in Orthocell. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.
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 -