A Novel Approach to Augmenting Allograft Hamstring Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions Utilizing a Resorbable Type I Collagen Matrix with Platelet Rich Plasma

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).

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Is Biological Augmentation Beneficial?

Surgical reconstruction in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures has proven to be a highly effective technique that usually provides satisfactory results. However, despite the majority of patients recovering their function after this procedure, ACL reconstruction (ACLR) is still imperfect. To improve these results, various biological augmentation (BA) techniques have been employed mostly in animal models. They include: (1) growth factors (bone morphogenetic protein, epidermal growth factor, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, basic fibroblast growth factor, transforming growth factor-β, hepatocyte growth factor, vascular endothelial growth factor, and platelet concentrates such as platelet-rich plasma, fibrin clot, and autologous conditioned serum), (2) mesenchymal stem cells, (3) autologous tissue, (4) various pharmaceuticals (matrix metalloproteinase-inhibitor alpha-2-macroglobulin bisphosphonates), (5) biophysical/environmental methods (hyperbaric oxygen, low-intensity pulsed ultrasound, extracorporeal shockwave therapy), (6) biomaterials (fixation methods, biological coatings, biosynthetic bone substitutes, osteoconductive materials), and (7) gene therapy. All of them have shown good results in experimental studies; however, the clinical studies on BA published so far are highly heterogeneous and have a low degree of evidence. The most widely used technique to date is platelet-rich plasma. My position is that orthopedic surgeons must be very cautious when considering using PRP or other BA methods in ACLR.