III.

III.

Background: Different indications and treatment options for combined injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and medial collateral ligament complex (MCL) are not clearly defined. Purpose: To perform a modified Delphi process with the Committee for Ligament Injuries of the German Knee Society (DKG) in order to structure and optimize the process of treating a combined injury to the ACL and MCL. Study Design: Consensus statement. Methods: Scientific questions and answers were created based on a comprehensive literature review using the central registers for controlled studies of Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane including the terms medial collateral ligament, anterior cruciate ligament, MCL, ACL, and outcome used in various combinations. The obtained statements passed 3 cycles of a modified Delphi process during which each was readjusted and rated according to the available evidence (grades A-E) by the members of the DKG Ligament Injuries Committee and its registered guests. Results: The majority of answers, including several questions with >1 graded answer, were evaluated as grade E (n = 16) or C (n = 10), indicating that a low level of scientific evidence was available for most of the answers. Only 5 answers were graded better than C: 3 answers with a grade of A and 2 answers with a grade of B. Only 1 answer was evaluated as grade D. An agreement of >80% (range, 83%-100%) among committee members was achieved for all statements. Conclusion: The results of this modified Delphi process offer a guideline for standardized patient care in cases of combined injuries to the ACL and MCL.

Purpose The aim of this consensus project was to create a treatment algorithm for the management of the ACL-injured patient which can serve as an aid in a shared decision-making process. Methods For this consensus process, a steering and a rating group were formed. In an initial face-to-face meeting, the steering group, together with the expert group, formed various key topic complexes for which various questions were formulated. For each key topic, a structured literature search was performed by the steering group. The results of the literature review were sent to the rating group with the option to give anonymous comments until a inal consensus voting was performed. Suicient consensus was deined as 80% agreement. Results During this consensus process, 15 key questions were identiied. The literature search for each key question resulted in 24 inal statements. Of these 24 inal statements, all achieved consensus. Conclusions This consensus process has shown that ACL rupture is a complex injury, and the outcome depends to a large extent on the frequently concomitant injuries (meniscus and/or cartilage damage). These additional injuries as well as various patient-speciic factors should play a role in the treatment decision. The present treatment algorithm represents a decision aid within the framework of a shared decision-making process for the ACL-injured patient. Level of evidence: Level V.