Early Compared with Delayed Reconstruction in Multiligament Knee Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes following early compared with delayed reconstruction in patients with multiligament knee injury (MLKI). METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis of patients with MLKI from 2007 to 2019 was conducted. Patients who underwent a reconstructive surgical procedure with ≥12 months of postoperative follow-up were included. Patients were stratified into early reconstruction (<6 weeks after the injury) and delayed reconstruction (12 weeks to 2 years after the injury). Multivariable regression models with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were utilized to compare the timing of the surgical procedure with the primary outcome (the Multiligament Quality of Life questionnaire [MLQOL]) and the secondary outcomes (manipulation under anesthesia [MUA], Kellgren-Lawrence [KL] osteoarthritis grade, knee laxity, and range of motion). RESULTS: A total of 131 patients met our inclusion criteria, with 75 patients in the early reconstruction group and 56 patients in the delayed reconstruction group. The mean time to the surgical procedure was 17.6 days in the early reconstruction group compared with 280 days in the delayed reconstruction group. The mean postoperative follow-up was 58 months. The early reconstruction group, compared with the delayed reconstruction group, included more lateral-sided injuries (49 patients [65%] compared with 23 [41%]; standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.44) and nerve injuries (36 patients [48%] compared with 9 patients [16%]; SMD, 0.72), and had a higher mean Schenck class (SMD, 0.57). After propensity adjustment, we found no difference between early and delayed reconstruction across the 4 MLQOL domains (p > 0.05). Patients in the early reconstruction group had higher odds of requiring MUA compared with the delayed reconstruction group (24 [32%] compared with 8 [14%]; IPTW-adjusted odds ratio [OR], 3.85 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.04 to 7.69]; p < 0.001) and had less knee flexion at the most recent follow-up (β, 6.34° [95% CI, 0.91° to 11.77°]; p = 0.023). Patients undergoing early reconstruction had lower KL osteoarthritis grades compared with patients in the delayed reconstruction group (OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.72]; p < 0.001). There were no differences in clinical laxity between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Early reconstruction of MLKIs likely increases the likelihood of postoperative arthrofibrosis compared with delayed reconstruction, but it may be protective against the development of osteoarthritis. When considering the timing of MLKI reconstruction, surgeons should consider the benefit that early reconstruction may convey on long-term outcomes but should caution patients regarding the possibility of requiring an MUA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".