Comparison of Clinical Outcomes after Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction using a Bone-patellar Tendon-bone Autograft and that Using a Double-Bundle Hamstring Tendon Autograft

Hamstring autografts demonstrate either similar or inferior outcomes to quadriceps or bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review of comparative studies

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical outcomes in patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (r-ACLR) using hamstring tendon (HT) autografts with those using either quadriceps tendon (QT) or bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autografts or allografts.

METHODS

Three databases were searched on 8 August 2023. The authors adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (R-AMSTAR) guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data on demographics, surgical details, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), rates of instability, failure and return to sport (RTS) were extracted.

RESULTS

Eleven studies comprising 859 patients were included in this review. Five studies compared HT and QT autografts. One study each reported greater IKDC scores (p = 0.04) and Tegner scores (p = 0.04) in the QT group, while one study each reported higher anterior translation (p = 0.04), rates of positive pivot shift (p = 0.03) and rates of failure (p = 0.03) in the HT group. Six studies compared HT and BPTB autografts with one study each reporting greater Lysholm scores (p = 0.02) and less side-to-side anterior laxity (p < 0.01) in the BPTB group. Two studies compared HT autografts with allografts with only one study reporting a faster time to RTS in the HT group than the allograft group (p < 0.001). All other comparisons were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

HT autografts result in either similar or inferior outcomes in r-ACLR when compared to QT or BPTB autograft options. Allografts resulted in similar outcomes to HT autografts apart from greater time to RTS for r-ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

A novel surgical technique for revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using an isolated rectus femoris tendon autograft

INTRODUCTION

Only a few anatomic studies have described an isolated rectus femoris tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. This study aims to demonstrate a new surgical technique utilising the rectus femoris tendon for ACL reconstruction. This study hypothesises that the rectus tendon autograft will yield satisfying postoperative outcomes in terms of stability, with minimal complications at the harvest site.

METHODS

This retrospective study investigated the outcomes of 28 revision ACL reconstructions using a rectus tendon autograft with a mean follow-up of 41.7 (range, 24.0-64.8) months. A 3 cm longitudinal incision was used to harvest the rectus tendon with an open tendon stripper. Intraoperative collected data included the length of the tendon and thickness of a 4-fold graft. Further outcome parameters include anterior cruciate ligament stability and range of motion. Additionally, postoperative complications, especially donor site morbidity, were documented in type and frequency.

RESULTS

The mean tendon length measured 32.4 cm (range, 30-35 cm). After preparing a 4-fold graft, the mean diameter was 9.2 mm (range, 8.0-10 mm) at the tibial and 9.0 mm (range, 7.5-10 mm) at the femoral end. Stability evaluated by the Lachman test improved significantly from 2 (Interquartile range (IQR), 2-3) preoperatively to 0 (IQR, 0-1) postoperatively (p < .001). Rerupture of the anterior cruciate ligament graft was observed in 2 patients (7.1%). Four patients showed a persistent extension deficit of about 5 degrees postoperatively. Two of them underwent revision surgery due to a Cyclops lesion. Only one patient complained of prolonged pain at the harvest site (3.6%).

CONCLUSION

The 4-fold rectus tendon represents a novel autograft technique in revision ACL reconstruction. This study provides evidence of appropriate graft dimensions and satisfying postoperative outcomes regarding stability. The technique is associated with a low complication rate at the harvest site.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, IV.

Effect of graft types for outcomes in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis was performed to compare outcomes among different types of graft for revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

METHODS

A comprehensive search from Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library was performed to identify relevant articles. Studies that conducted a comparative analysis on outcomes among different types of grafts were included. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 software.

RESULTS

In total, 7 non-randomized studies with a minimum 1-year follow-up were included in analysis, and all studies compared outcomes between autograft and allograft. International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee (IKDC) scores and side-to-side anterior laxity were not significantly different between autograft and allograft. Revision ACLR with allograft had a higher risk of failure than autograft at the final follow-up (OR=2.22, 95% CI=1.55-3.18). The rates of return to pre-injury type of sport and return to same and higher level of pre-injury sport were not significantly different between autograft and allograft.

CONCLUSION

The outcomes of IKDC score, side-to-side anterior laxity, and rates of return to sport were not significantly different between autograft and allograft. Autografts provide a significantly lower risk of failure than allografts in revision ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; meta-analysis.