Clinical Outcomes and Failure Rate of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Autograft Hamstring Versus a Hybrid-graft

Author(s):  
Brian Leo ◽  
Andres Alvarez-Pinzon ◽  
Michael Krill ◽  
Leticia Barksdale
Author(s):  
Yousif Eliya ◽  
Khaled Nawar ◽  
Benjamin B Rothrauff ◽  
Bryson P Lesniak ◽  
Volker Musahl ◽  
...  

ImportanceThis review highlights the differences in outcomes between anatomical and non-anatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) techniques.ObjectiveTo compare clinical and functional outcomes between anatomical and non-anatomical ACLR techniques.Evidence reviewA search of MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed from 1 January 2000 to 24 October 2019 was conducted. Randomised and prospective primary ACLR studies using autograft and a minimum of 2 years of follow-up were included. The Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Checklist (AARSC) was used to categorise studies as anatomical. Outcomes analysed included failure rate, knee stability and functional outcomes. A meta-analysis using risk ratio and mean differences was conducted using a random effects model.FindingsThirty-six studies were included, representing 3710 patients with a follow-up range of 24–300 months. The overall failure rate was 96/1470 (6.5%) and 131/1952 (6.7%) in the anatomical group and non-anatomical group, respectively. The pooled results of the overall failure rate showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the anatomical and the non-anatomical groups (p=0.96). There were 37/60 (61.7%) and 29/67 (43.3%) traumatic failures in the anatomical and non-anatomical groups, respectively. The number of patients with the negative postoperative pivot-shift test was 995/1252 (79.5%) and 1140/1589 (71.1%) in the anatomical and non-anatomical groups, respectively. The pooled results indicated a statistically significant higher number of patients with a positive pivot shift in the non-anatomical group compared with the anatomical group (p=0.03).Conclusions and relevanceThis study demonstrated that the overall failure rate was similar between the anatomical and non-anatomical approaches. However, the anatomical ACLR demonstrated a significantly superior restoration of rotatory stability, as evidenced by a higher percentage with a negative postoperative pivot-shift test. Non-anatomical ACLR resulted in higher rates of atraumatic graft ruptures and persistent rotatory knee instability. Surgeons should consider anatomical ACLR when treating rotatory knee stability in patients.Level of evidenceII, systematic review and meta-analysis of level I and II studies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document