Allograft Augmentation of Hamstring Autograft in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Results in Equivalent Outcomes to Autograft Alone

There is no difference in the efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autograft combined with or without ligament augmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aims to determine the efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using autograft combined with or without ligament augmentation.

METHODS

A computerized search of the databases was conducted, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Library. Only prospective or retrospective comparative studies with a minimum 2-year follow-up were considered for inclusion. Two independent reviewers performed data extraction and methodological quality assessment. A Mantel-Haenszel analysis was used for the pooling of results. Sensitivity analysis was performed to maintain the stability of results. The egger test was applied to assess the publication bias.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included. The total cohort was 1353 patients (non-augmented group: 763 patients; augmented group: 590 patients). There were three Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs, Level I), six retrospective comparative studies (Level III) and five case-control studies (Level III). The follow-up rate was ≥ 88% and the follow-up periods were ≥ 24 months in all included studies. The augmented graft used to compare with autograft included the Ligament Augmentation Device (LAD), the Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System (LARS) artificial ligament, FiberTape, hamstring tendon allograft, degradable poly (urethane urea). No significant differences were observed between the augmented and non-augmented groups regarding postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including the International Knee Documentation Committee score, Lysholm score and Tegner score, knee laxity, including KT-1000, side-to-side difference, Lachman test and pivot shift and rate of graft failure.

CONCLUSIONS

ACLR using autografts combined with ligament augmentation shows no advantages in PROs, knee laxity and graft failure rate compared with using autografts only.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The research protocol was registered at the PROSPERO database (CRD42022324784).

Various Definitions of Failure Are Used in Studies of Patients Who Underwent Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Purpose

To conduct a literature review to assess the definitions of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) failure used throughout the orthopaedic literature.

Methods

A systematic search of Embase, Ovid Medline, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science was conducted by a university librarian to identity level I-IV clinical studies on ACLR failure. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients who underwent ACLR and included a definition of failure of ACLR. Patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repairs, animal/cadaver studies, review studies, non-English language articles, and non-full text articles were excluded. Failure data were extracted from each study and categorized. Other data that were extracted included follow-up time after ACLR, failure reoperation rate, and failure reoperation procedure. Descriptive statistics was used to analyze the data.

Results

Out of 2,775 studies, 104 (3.75%) met inclusion criteria and were analyzed in this review. The most common definition of ACLR failure included the use of a physical examination, specifically Lachman's test (21/104 [20.2%]), anterior laxity assessment, or a Pivot-Shift test (24/104 [35.2%]) or undergoing or requiring revision ACLR (39/104 [37.5%]). Although some studies used quantitative tests or imaging to help define "failure," others simply defined it as graft rerupture that was otherwise not defined (22/104 [22.5%]). Other common definitions included: the use of imaging (magnetic resonance imaging/radiographs) to confirm graft re-rupture (37/104 [35.6%]), patient-reported outcomes (recurrent instability)/patient reported outcomes measures (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], Tegner) (18/104 [17.3%]), and the use of an arthrometer (KT-1000/2000, Rollimeter, or Kneelax) (17/104 [16.3%]). The least common definitions included graft failure or rerupture confirmed by arthroscopy (13/104 [12.5%]) and nonrevision surgery (2/104 [1.0%]). The failure rate of this procedure ranged from 0% to 100% depending on the definition of "failure."

Conclusion

In this study, we found that a variety of definitions of failure are used among studies published in the orthopaedic literature. The most common criteria for failure of ACLR were the results of physical examination tests (35%), the need for undergoing a revision ACLR (36%), and the use of imaging to diagnose the failure (34%). About 17% of studies included in this review used patient-reported outcomes, specifically recurrent instability, or PROMs (IKDC, KOOS, Tegner) in their assessment of failure of ACLR. The least used definitions of "failure" of ACLR included nonrevision ACLR surgery (2%). Although some studies used similar tests or categories in their definition of failure, there were a variety of score and grade cutoff points between them.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

Comparison of failure rates and functional outcomes between hamstring autografts and hybrid grafts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The viability of augmenting small-diameter hamstring autografts with allografts remains unclear. Recent studies have reported different clinical results after allograft augmentation. Hence, we sought to determine whether hamstring autografts and hybrid grafts differed in terms of failure rates and functional outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. We also evaluated whether the results of the comparisons differed based on allograft sterilization methods.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed by searching the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases to identify prospective or retrospective studies (evidence levels 1, 2, or 3) that compared the failure rates and functional outcomes of ACL reconstruction using autografts and hybrid grafts.

RESULTS

We identified 15 relevant studies, including 1,521 patients, with 798 and 723 treated using autografts and hybrid grafts, respectively. Fourteen studies were retrospective comparative studies, and one was a prospective randomized controlled trial. Of these, three studies used non-irradiated allografts. In the analysis of all participants, no significant differences in failure rates and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores were observed between the autograft and hybrid graft groups. Comparing the autograft and hybrid graft groups that used non-irradiated allografts, no differences in the failure rates and subjective IKDC scores were also noted. Meanwhile, in the groups that used irradiated allograft, the autograft group demonstrated higher Lysholm knee scores and reduced anterior laxity than the hybrid graft group.

DISCUSSION

Overall, ACL reconstruction using hybrid grafts may not reduce failure rates compared to reconstructions using hamstring autografts, although hybrid grafts with irradiation may decrease functional outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; systematic review of level II and III studies.

Risk Factors for Revision or Rerupture After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The rerupture or need for revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a serious complication. Preventive strategies that target the early identification of risk factors are important to reduce the incidence of additional surgery.

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate risk factors for revision or rerupture after ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Literature searches were performed in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from database inception to November 2021 and updated in January 2022. Quantitative, original studies reporting potential adjusted risk factors were included. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for potential risk factors.

RESULTS

A total of 71 studies across 13 countries with a total sample size of 629,120 met the inclusion criteria. Fifteen factors were associated with an increase in the risk of revision or rerupture after ACLR: male sex (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.14-1.41), younger age (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.05-1.08), lower body mass index (BMI) (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00-1.06), family history (OR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.50-4.08), White race (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.08-1.60), higher posterolateral tibial slope (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.05-1.26), preoperative high-grade anterior knee laxity (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.46-3.64), higher baseline Marx activity level (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.13), return to a high activity level/sport (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.15-3.57), an ACLR within less than a year after injury (OR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.81-2.32), a concomitant medial collateral ligament (MCL) injury (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.31-2.00), an anteromedial portal or transportal technique (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.22-1.51), hamstring tendon (HT) autografts (vs bone-patellar tendon-bone [BPTB] autografts) (OR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.40-1.82), allografts (OR, 2.63; 95% CI, 1.65-4.19), and smaller graft diameter (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05-1.38). The other factors failed to show an association with an increased risk of revision or rerupture after ACLR.

CONCLUSION

Male sex, younger age, lower BMI, family history, White race, higher posterolateral tibial slope, preoperative high-grade anterior knee laxity, higher baseline Marx activity level, return to a high activity level/sport, an ACLR within less than a year from injury, a concomitant MCL injury, an anteromedial portal or transportal technique, HT autografts (vs BPTB autografts), allografts, and smaller graft diameter may increase the risk of revision or rerupture after ACLR. Raising awareness and implementing effective preventions/interventions for risk factors are priorities for clinical practitioners to reduce the incidence of revision or rerupture after ACLR.

Autograft-Only and Allograft-Augmented Hamstring Autograft Have Similar Failure Rates After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Purpose

To compare failure rates and clinical outcomes after hamstring autograft anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with and without allograft augmentation by a single surgeon otherwise using the same surgical technique.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis with prospectively collected patient-reported outcomes of primary hamstring autograft ACL reconstruction with and without allograft augmentation performed in a military population by a single surgeon. The primary outcome measure was graft failure, defined as graft rupture confirmed by use of magnetic resonance imaging scans and/or revision ACL reconstruction. The secondary outcome measure was the postoperative Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score.

Results

This study included 112 patients with a mean follow-up period of 65.3 months. In patients with a graft diameter of 8 mm or greater, there was no difference in failure rates (9.4% for autograft only vs 6.3% for hybrid, P = .59). There was a higher failure rate in patients in the autograft-only group with a graft diameter of less than 8 mm (29.4%) when compared with the hybrid graft group (6.3%, P = .008). There were no hybrid grafts less than 8 mm in diameter. There were no differences in the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score between groups as long as the graft diameter was 8 mm or greater.

Conclusions

In patients undergoing hamstring ACL reconstruction, there was no significant difference in graft failure rates or outcome scores between autograft only and autograft with allograft augmentation as long as grafts were 8 mm or greater. High failure rates were seen when the graft diameter was less than 8 mm.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

No difference in revision risk between autologous hamstring graft less than 8 mm versus hybrid graft 8 mm or larger in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

Hamstring autograft (HA) is commonly used for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). However, if the harvested HA is inadequate in diameter, it is often augmented with an allograft tendon, forming a hybrid graft (HY). This study sought to evaluate aseptic revision risk following HA versus HY ACLR.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed using data obtained from our healthcare system's ACLR registry. Patients ≤ 25 years of age who underwent primary isolated ACLR were identified (2005-2020). Graft type and diameter size was the primary exposure of interest: < 8 mm HA and ≥ 8 mm HY. A secondary analysis was performed to examine 7 mm HA and 7.5 mm HA vs ≥ 8 mm HY. Propensity score-weighted Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate the risk of aseptic revision.

RESULTS

The study sample included 1,945 ACLR: 548 ≥ 8 mm HY, 651 7 mm HA, and 672 7.5 mm HA. The crude cumulative aseptic revision probability at 8-years for ≥ 8 mm HY was 9.1%, 11.1% for 7 mm HA, and 11.2% for 7.5 mm HA. In adjusted analysis, no difference in revision risk was observed for < 8 mm HA (hazard ratio [HR] 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-1.82), 7 mm HA (HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.71-2.11), or 7.5 mm HA (HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.74-1.82) compared to ≥ 8 mm HY.

CONCLUSION

In a US-based cohort of ACLR patients aged ≤ 25 years, we failed to observe any differences in aseptic revision risk for HA < 8 mm compared to HY ≥ 8 mm. Augmentation of a HA as small as 7 mm is not necessary to prevent a revision surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Quadruple Hamstring Autograft Technique for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Reduces Allograft Augmentation

Purpose

To assess the discrepancy in graft diameter between double- and quadruple-folded hamstring autografts and the need for allograft augmentation to obtain an adequate graft diameter during arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Methods

All patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft between 2017 and 2021 at a single institution by a single surgeon were identified. The surgeon changed from double-folded hamstring autograft to quadruple-folded hamstring autograft within the study period.

Results

A total of 191 patients were identified, of whom 57 received double-folded autografts and 134 quadruple-folded autografts. Patient characteristics between cohorts were similar. Median double-folded graft size (7.5 mm; interquartile range, 7.0-8.0 mm) was significantly thinner than the quadruple-folded graft size (9 mm; interquartile range, 8.5-9.5 mm, P = .001). Quadruple-folded autograft was less likely to require an allograft augmentation than the double-folded autograft (0.7% vs 26.3%) (odds ratio 0.02; 95% confidence interval 0.00-0.16; P < .001).

Conclusions

Quadruple-folded hamstring autograft provides a larger graft diameter and reduced need for allograft augmentation.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

All-Inside Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Quadrupled Semitendinosus: Comparable 2-Year Outcomes in Male and Female Patients

PURPOSE

To determine 2-year functional outcomes using an all-inside quadrupled semitendinosus anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction technique in male and female patients.

METHODS

A total of 100 patients who underwent quadrupled semitendinosus all-inside hamstring ACL reconstruction by a single surgeon were enrolled. Patient-reported outcome scores collected preoperatively and postoperatively included visual analog scale, Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12; Physical and Mental), Marx Activity Scale, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC).

RESULTS

A total of 100 ACL reconstructions comprising 62 female, and 38 male patients were included in this study. Mean graft diameter was 9.4 mm in female and 9.8 mm in male patients (range, 9-11). Outcome scores demonstrated improvement from preoperative to 2-year postoperative respectively: visual analog scale pain 3.18, 1.07, VR-12 physical 36.35, 52.64, VR-12 mental 53.96, 54.65, KOOS pain 59.17, 89.03, KOOS symptoms 52.64, 80.79, KOOS Activities of Daily Living 69.38, 95.4, KOOS Sport 28.97, 81.25, KOOS Quality of Life 27.54, 71.56, WOMAC Pain 71.56, 92.65, WOMAC Stiffness 60.55, 84.13, and WOMAC Function 69.38, 95.4. Marx activity score decreased from baseline (10.98) to 2 years' postoperatively (8.75). At 2 years, patient expectations were met or exceeded with regards to pain (94%), motion and strength (91%), normal function of daily living (95%), and return to sport (79%).

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomic all-inside quadrupled semitendinosus ACL reconstruction improves functional outcomes similarly to previous studies between baseline and clinical follow-up at 1-year and 2-years postoperatively and is comparable in both male and female patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.