Adjustable-Loop Devices Promote Graft Revascularization in the Femoral Tunnel After ACL Reconstruction: Comparison With Fixed-Loop Devices Using Magnetic Resonance Angiography

Both Adjustable and Fixed Loop Hamstring Tendon Graft Fixation Have Similar Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Purpose

This study aims to compare the outcomes of fixed-loop device (FLD) vs adjustable-loop device (ALD) graft fixation with up to 2-year follow-up in patients undergoing primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in a predominantly Asian setting.

Methods

Prospectively collected outcome measures as well as clinical records of patients who underwent primary ACLR using either FLD or ALD fixation of hamstring tendon autograft performed by a single surgeon were reviewed. The surgeon in this study used a fixed-loop device from 2018 to 2019 and then changed to adjustable loop from 2019 to 2020. Suspensory fixation was performed on the femoral side, and aperture (interference screw) fixation was performed on the tibial side. Outcome measures included knee range of motion, KT-1000 arthrometer testing, Lysholm knee score, and Tegner activity scale. Patients were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at regular intervals of 6, 12, and 24 months.

Results

A total of 105 patients were identified. Forty-six were excluded due to incomplete follow-up data, so 59 patients with full 2-year follow-up were included in the final study group. Both groups (FLD vs ALD) were similar in demographics except for age (P = .042). Out of 105, there were 59 patients remaining in the study group with 2-year follow-up data. No significant differences were observed between the 2 groups at all respective testing intervals.

Conclusions

FLDs and ALDs for suspensory fixation of hamstring tendon autograft in ACLR had similar clinical outcomes with a minimum of 2-year follow up. There is no evidence of graft loosening from loop lengthening.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative trial.

Adjustable-Loop Cortical Suspensory Fixation Results in Greater Tibial Tunnel Widening Compared to Interference Screw Fixation in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Background: Although the use of adjustable-loop suspensory fixation has increased in recent years, the influence of the shortcomings of suspensory fixation, such as the bungee-cord or windshield-wiper effects, on tunnel widening remains to be clarified. Hypothesis/Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspensory fixation and interference screw fixation in terms of tunnel widening and clinical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). We hypothesized that tunnel widening in the adjustable-loop femoral cortical suspensory fixation (AL) group would be comparable to that in the interference screw fixation (IF) group. Methods: This study evaluated patients who underwent primary ACLR at our institution between March 2015 and June 2019. The femoral and tibial tunnel diameters were measured using plain radiographs in the immediate postoperative period and 2 years after ACLR. Tunnel widening and clinical outcomes (Lysholm score, 2000 International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, and Tegner activity level) were compared between the two groups. Results: There were 48 patients (mean age, 29.8 ± 12.0 years) in the AL group and 44 patients (mean age, 26.0 ± 9.5 years) in the IF group. Tunnel widening was significantly greater in the AL group than that in the IF group at the tibia anteroposterior (AP) middle (2.03 mm vs. 1.32 mm, p = 0.017), tibia AP distal (1.52 mm vs. 0.84 mm, p = 0.012), tibia lateral proximal (1.85 mm vs. 1.00 mm, p = 0.001), tibia lateral middle (2.36 mm vs. 1.03 mm, p < 0.001), and tibia lateral distal (2.34 mm vs. 0.85 mm, p < 0.001) levels. There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to femoral tunnel widening and clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Tibial tunnel widening was significantly greater in the AL group than in the IF group at 2 years after primary ACLR. However, the clinical outcomes in the two groups were comparable at 2 years.

Adjustable-loop implants are non-inferior to fixed-loop implants for femoral fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

PURPOSE

Button implants with an adjustable-loop device (ALD) are often used in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Clinical research comparing ALDs with fixed-loop devices (FLD) has mainly been conducted in small patient populations with short follow-up times. To determine whether ALDs are safe to use in ACLR, a non-inferiority study with a large sample population and a long follow-up period would be beneficial. This study compared ALDs with FLDs to determine non-inferior revision surgery rates, knee stability, and patient-reported outcomes (PROM) in ACLRs.

METHODS

This non-inferiority register-based cohort study was conducted using data from the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Registry (DKRR). A total of 12,723 patients > 15 years of age with primary ACLR using hamstring tendon autografts and either an FLD or ALD for femoral fixation were included: 9719 patients were in the FLD group, and 3014 patients were in the ALD group. The primary outcome was revision ACLR with a non-inferiority margin for ALDs at 4% at the 2-year follow-up. The secondary outcomes were anterior and rotatory knee stability and PROMs based on the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at the 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

The crude cumulative revision rates in ALD implants at 2 and 5 years were 2.1% (95% CI 1.62-2.68) and 5.0% (95% CI 4.22-5.96), respectively. In the FLD group, the rates were 2.2% (95% CI 1.89-2.48) at 2 years and 4.7% (95% CI 4.31-5.20) at 5 years. The 1-year side-to-side differences were 0.97 mm (95% CI 0.90-1.03) in the ALD group and 1.45 mm (95% CI 1.41-1.49) in the FLD group. In the FLD group, 13% had a positive pivot shift, and in the ALD group, 6% had a positive pivot shift. There were no differences in KOOS.

CONCLUSION

ALDs were non-inferior to FLDs regarding revision rates, knee stability, and patient-reported outcomes. Based on this conclusion, ALDs are safe to use for femoral fixation in ACLR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.