Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

UCSF

UC San Francisco Previously Published Works bannerUCSF

Clinical Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group.

  • Author(s): Svantesson, Eleonor
  • Hamrin Senorski, Eric
  • Webster, Kate E
  • Karlsson, Jón
  • Diermeier, Theresa
  • Rothrauff, Benjamin B
  • Meredith, Sean J
  • Rauer, Thomas
  • Irrgang, James J
  • Spindler, Kurt P
  • Ma, C Benjamin
  • Musahl, Volker
  • The Panther Symposium Acl Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group
  • Fu, Freddie H
  • Ayeni, Olufemi R
  • Della Villa, Francesco
  • Della Villa, Stefano
  • Dye, Scott
  • Ferretti, Mario
  • Getgood, Alan
  • Järvelä, Timo
  • Kaeding, Christopher C
  • Kuroda, Ryosuke
  • Lesniak, Bryson
  • Marx, Robert G
  • Maletis, Gregory B
  • Pinczewski, Leo
  • Ranawat, Anil
  • Reider, Bruce
  • Seil, Romain
  • van Eck, Carola
  • Wolf, Brian R
  • Yung, Patrick
  • Zaffagnini, Stefano
  • Hao Zheng, Ming
  • et al.
Abstract

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.

Many UC-authored scholarly publications are freely available on this site because of the UC's open access policies. Let us know how this access is important for you.

Main Content
Current View