Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this ESSKA consensus is to give recommendations based on evidence and expert opinion to improve diagnosis, preoperative planning, indication and surgical strategy in ACL revision.
METHODS: The European expert surgeons and scientists were divided into four groups to participate in this consensus. A \"literature group\" (four surgeons); \"steering group\" (14 surgeons and scientists); \"rating group\" (19 surgeons) and finally \"peer review group\" (51 representatives of the ESSKA-affiliated national societies from 27 countries). The steering group prepared eighteen question-answer sets. The quality of the answers received grades of recommendation ranging from A (high-level scientific support), to B (scientific presumption), C (low level scientific support) or D (expert opinion). These question-answer sets were then evaluated by the rating group. All answers were scored from 1 to 9. The comments of the rating group were incorporated by the steering group and the consensus was submitted to the rating group a second time. Once a general consensus was reached between the steering and rating groups, the question-answer sets were submitted to the peer review group. A final combined meeting of all the members of the consensus was held to ratify the document.
RESULTS: The literature review for the diagnosis and preoperative planning of ACL revision revealed a rather low scientific quality. None of the 18 questions was graded A and six received a grade B. The mean rating of all the questions by the rating group was 8.4 ± 0.3. The questions and recommendations are listed below.
CONCLUSIONS: ACL revision surgery is a widely debated subject with many different opinions and techniques. The literature reveals a poor level of standardisation. Therefore, this international consensus project is of great importance.
METHODS: II.
METHODS: The European expert surgeons and scientists were divided into four groups to participate in this consensus. A \"literature group\" (four surgeons); \"steering group\" (14 surgeons and scientists); \"rating group\" (19 surgeons) and finally \"peer review group\" (51 representatives of the ESSKA-affiliated national societies from 27 countries). The steering group prepared eighteen question-answer sets. The quality of the answers received grades of recommendation ranging from A (high-level scientific support), to B (scientific presumption), C (low level scientific support) or D (expert opinion). These question-answer sets were then evaluated by the rating group. All answers were scored from 1 to 9. The comments of the rating group were incorporated by the steering group and the consensus was submitted to the rating group a second time. Once a general consensus was reached between the steering and rating groups, the question-answer sets were submitted to the peer review group. A final combined meeting of all the members of the consensus was held to ratify the document.
RESULTS: The literature review for the diagnosis and preoperative planning of ACL revision revealed a rather low scientific quality. None of the 18 questions was graded A and six received a grade B. The mean rating of all the questions by the rating group was 8.4 ± 0.3. The questions and recommendations are listed below.
CONCLUSIONS: ACL revision surgery is a widely debated subject with many different opinions and techniques. The literature reveals a poor level of standardisation. Therefore, this international consensus project is of great importance.
METHODS: II.
摘要：
目的：本ESSKA共识的目的是根据证据和专家意见提出建议，以改善诊断，术前计划,ACL翻修的适应症和手术策略。
方法：欧洲专家外科医生和科学家被分成四组参与这一共识。“文献小组”（四名外科医生）；“指导小组”（14名外科医生和科学家）；“评级小组”（19名外科医生），最后是“同行评审小组”（来自27个国家的ESSKA附属国家协会的51名代表）。指导小组准备了18个问答集。回答的质量从A（高级科学支持），对B(科学推定)，C（低级科学支持）或D（专家意见）。然后由评级组评估这些问答集。所有答案都从1到9分。指导小组纳入了评级小组的意见，并将共识第二次提交给评级小组。一旦指导和评级小组达成普遍共识，问答集已提交给同行评审小组.举行了协商一致所有成员的最后一次合并会议，以批准该文件。
结果：ACL翻修术的诊断和术前计划的文献综述显示，科学质量相当低。18个问题中没有一个是A级，六个获得了B级。评级组所有问题的平均评级为8.4±0.3。下面列出了问题和建议。
结论：ACL翻修手术是一个广泛争论的主题，有许多不同的观点和技术。文献显示，标准化水平很低。因此,这个国际共识项目非常重要。
方法：II.
方法：欧洲专家外科医生和科学家被分成四组参与这一共识。“文献小组”（四名外科医生）；“指导小组”（14名外科医生和科学家）；“评级小组”（19名外科医生），最后是“同行评审小组”（来自27个国家的ESSKA附属国家协会的51名代表）。指导小组准备了18个问答集。回答的质量从A（高级科学支持），对B(科学推定)，C（低级科学支持）或D（专家意见）。然后由评级组评估这些问答集。所有答案都从1到9分。指导小组纳入了评级小组的意见，并将共识第二次提交给评级小组。一旦指导和评级小组达成普遍共识，问答集已提交给同行评审小组.举行了协商一致所有成员的最后一次合并会议，以批准该文件。
结果：ACL翻修术的诊断和术前计划的文献综述显示，科学质量相当低。18个问题中没有一个是A级，六个获得了B级。评级组所有问题的平均评级为8.4±0.3。下面列出了问题和建议。
结论：ACL翻修手术是一个广泛争论的主题，有许多不同的观点和技术。文献显示，标准化水平很低。因此,这个国际共识项目非常重要。
方法：II.
