scholarly journals Migration of a Meniscal Repair Implant Mimicking Meniscal Injury

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-119
Author(s):  
Takatomo Mine ◽  
Koichiro Ihara ◽  
Hiroyuki Kawamura ◽  
Michio Shinohara ◽  
Ryutaro Kuriyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Repair ◽  
Suture Repair ◽  
Meniscal Injury ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Meniscal Damage

Complications after arthroscopic meniscal suture repair have been reported. Migration of a meniscal repair implant mimicking meniscal injury is rare. A 28-year-old female had undergone Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) reconstruction at another hospital 12 years ago . The remaining instability after ACL reconstruction resulted in medial meniscal damage, wear and narrowing in the posterior third. The H-fix that was used in the meniscal repair became detached, exposing the inside of the knee joint. Meniscal repair is a successful procedure in conjunction with ACL reconstruction. However, when knee instability after ACL reconstruction remains, the choice of meniscal repair implants may lead to potential complications even after long-term clinical follow-up.

scholarly journals Intermediate- to Long-Term Results of Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 232596711769359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew N. Pike ◽  
Tim Bryant ◽  
Takahiro Ogura ◽  
Tom Minas
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Chondral Defects ◽  
Chondrocyte Implantation ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Autologous Chondrocyte

Background: Cartilage injury associated with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures is common; however, relatively few reports exist on concurrent cartilage repair with ACL reconstruction. Autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) has been utilized successfully for treatment of moderate to large chondral defects. Hypothesis: ACL insufficiency with relatively large chondral defects may be effectively managed with concurrent ACL reconstruction and ACI. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Patients undergoing concurrent ACL primary or revision reconstruction with ACI of single or multiple cartilage defects were prospectively evaluated for a minimum 2 years. Pre- and postoperative outcome measures included the modified Cincinnati Rating Scale (MCRS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, visual analog pain scales, and postsurgery satisfaction surveys. ACI graft failure or persistent pain without functional improvement were considered treatment failures. Results: Twenty-six patients were included, with 13 primary and 13 revision ACL reconstructions performed. Mean defect total surface area was 8.4 cm2, with a mean follow-up of 95 months (range, 24-240 months). MCRS improved from 3.62 ± 1.42 to 5.54 ± 2.32, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index from 45.31 ± 17.27 to 26.54 ± 17.71, and visual analog pain scale from 6.19 ± 1.27 to 3.65 ± 1.77 (all Ps <.001). Eight patients were clinical failures, 69% of patients were improved at final follow-up, and 92% stated they would likely undergo the procedure again. No outcome correlation was found with regard to age, body mass index, sex, defect size/number, follow-up time, or primary versus revision ACL reconstruction. In subanalysis, revision ACL reconstructions had worse preoperative MCRS scores and greater defect surface areas. However, revision MCRS score improvements were greater, resulting in similar final functional scores when compared with primary reconstructions. Conclusion: Challenging cases of ACL tears with large chondral defects treated with concurrent ACL reconstruction and ACI can lead to moderately improved pain and function at long-term follow-up. Factors associated with clinical failure are not clear. When combined with ACI, patients undergoing revision ACL reconstructions have worse function preoperatively compared with those undergoing primary reconstructions but have similar final outcomes.

Seventeen-Year Follow-up After Meniscal Repair With Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in a Pediatric and Adolescent Population

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (14) ◽  
pp. 3361-3367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam J. Tagliero ◽  
Vishal S. Desai ◽  
Nicholas I. Kennedy ◽  
Christopher L. Camp ◽  
Michael J. Stuart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Clinical Success ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Repair ◽  
Clinical Success Rate ◽  
Adolescent Population ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Studies have shown good and excellent clinical and radiographic results after meniscal repair. Limited published information exists on the long-term outcomes, however, especially in a pediatric and adolescent population. Purpose: To determine long-term results of meniscal repair and concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in a pediatric and adolescent population. Specifically, the aims were to determine the clinical success rate of meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction, compare results with midterm outcomes, and analyze risk factors for failure. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Cases of meniscal repair with concomitant ACL reconstruction between 1990 and 2005 were reviewed among patients aged ≤18 years. Patient demographics, injury history, and surgical details were recorded, and risk factors for failure were analyzed. Physical examination findings and clinical outcomes at latest available follow-up were collected. Subjective knee outcomes were compared with midterm results. Descriptive statistics and univariate analysis were used to evaluate the available data. Results: Forty-seven patients (30 females, 17 males) with a mean age of 16 years (SD, 1.37) and a mean follow-up of 16.6 years (SD, 3.57) were included in this study. Overall, 13 patients (28%) failed meniscal repair and required repeat surgery at the time of final follow-up. Of the 13 failures, 9 underwent a subsequent meniscectomy; 2, meniscectomy and revision ACL reconstruction; 1, meniscal repair and revision ACL reconstruction; and 1, meniscal repair and subsequent meniscectomy. Mean International Knee Documentation Committee scores improved from 47.9 preoperatively to 87.7 postoperatively ( P < .01), and the mean score at long-term follow-up (87.7) did not significantly differ from that at the midterm follow-up (88.5) at a mean 7.4 years ( P = .97). Mean Tegner Activity Scale scores improved from 1.9 preoperatively to 6.3 postoperatively ( P < .01) and decreased from 8.3 at preinjury to 6.3 at final long-term follow-up ( P < .01). Conclusion: In conclusion, the long-term overall clinical success rate (failure-free survival) was 72% for repair of pediatric and adolescent meniscal tears in the setting of concomitant ACL reconstruction. Patients reported excellent knee subjective outcome scores that remained favorable when compared with midterm follow-up.

scholarly journals Prevalence and influence of tibial tunnel widening after isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using patella-bone-tendon-bone-graft: long-term follow-up

2012 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Struewer ◽  
Turgay Efe ◽  
Thomas Manfred Frangen ◽  
Tim Schwarting ◽  
Benjamin Buecking ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Tibial Tunnel ◽  
Tunnel Widening ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Grade Ii ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

The aim of the present study was to evaluate incidence, degree and impact of tibial tunnel widening (TW) on patient-reported long-term clinical outcome, knee joint stability and prevalence of osteoarthritis (OA) after isolated anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. On average, 13.5 years after ACL reconstruction via patella-bone-tendon-bone autograft, 73 patients have been re-evaluated. Inclusion criteria consisted of an isolated anterior cruciate ligament rupture and reconstruction, a minimum of 10-year follow-up and no previous anterior cruciate ligament repair or associated intra-articular lesions. Clinical evaluation was performed via the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score and the Tegner and Lysholm scores. Instrumental anterior laxity testing was carried out with the KT-1000™ arthrometer. The degree of degenerative changes and the prevalence of osteoarthritis were assessed with the Kellgren-Lawrence score. Tibial tunnel enlargement was radiographically evaluated on both antero-posterior and lateral views under establishment of 4 degrees of tibial tunnel widening by measuring the actual tunnel diameters in mm on the sclerotic margins of the inserted tunnels on 3 different points (T1-T3). Afterwards, a conversion of the absolute values in mm into a 4 staged ratio, based on the comparison to the results of the initial drill-width, should provide a better quantification and statistical analysis. Evaluation was performed postoperatively as well as on 2 year follow-up and 13 years after ACL reconstruction. Minimum follow-up was 10 years. 75% of patients were graded A or B according to IKDC score. The mean Lysholm score was 90.2 ± 4.8 (25-100). Radiological assessment on long-term follow-up showed in 45% a grade I, in 24% a grade II, in 17% a grade III and in additional 12% a grade IV enlargement of the tibial tunnel. No evident progression of TW was found in comparison to the 2 year results. Radiological evaluation revealed degenerative changes in sense of a grade II OA in 54% of patients. Prevalence of a grade III or grade IV OA was found in 20%. Correlation analysis showed no significant relationship between the amount of tibial tunnel enlargement (P&gt;0.05), long-term clinical results, anterior joint laxity or prevalence of osteoarthritis. Tunnel widening remains a radiological phenomenon which is most commonly observed within the short to midterm intervals after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and subsequently stabilises on mid and long- term follow-up. It does not adversely affect long-term clinical outcome and stability. Furthermore, tunnel widening doesn’t constitute an increasing prevalence of osteoarthritis.

Deteriorating Outcomes after Meniscal Repair Using the Meniscus Arrow in Knees Undergoing Concurrent Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 1138-1141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory P. Lee ◽  
David R. Diduch
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Repair ◽  
Suture Repair ◽  
Meniscus Arrow ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Inside Out

Background An increased awareness of the degenerative changes that occur in the knee after meniscectomy has led to efforts to salvage the injured meniscus. Numerous devices have been developed in an effort to provide the dual benefits of a durable meniscal repair and minimal invasiveness. Hypothesis The Meniscus Arrow is comparable to conventional inside-out suture repair in accomplishing long-term healing of meniscal tears. Study Design Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods This study is an extended follow-up of an original series of 32 patients withoutcomes analysis. All patients underwent meniscal repair with exclusive use of the arrow. All repairs were performed in the context of a concomitant anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Follow-up assessment included physical examination, arthrometry, the International Knee Documentation Committee instrument, and the Knee Disorders Subjective History visual analog scale. Intermediate follow-up at a mean of 2.3 years yielded a success rate of 90.6%. The mean follow-up in the present study has been extended to 6.6 years. Results The extended follow-up analysis revealed a substantial attrition in the success rate of this series of patients undergoing meniscal repair with the arrow. A 90.6% success rate at a mean follow-up of 2.3 years deteriorated to 71.4% at 6.6 years. Conclusion This study provides the longest follow-up in the literature of any of the all-inside meniscal repair implants. The Meniscus Arrow demonstrated long-term meniscal healing rates inferior to those found in the literature for inside-out suture repair techniques.

scholarly journals Meniscal Repair in the Setting of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Results From the MARS Cohort

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (12) ◽  
pp. 2978-2985 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Rick W. Wright ◽  
Laura J. Huston ◽  
Amanda K. Haas ◽  
Samuel K. Nwosu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Failure Rate ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meniscal Repair ◽  
Subsequent Treatment ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Revision Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Meniscal preservation has been demonstrated to contribute to long-term knee health. This has been a successful intervention in patients with isolated tears and tears associated with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, the results of meniscal repair in the setting of revision ACL reconstruction have not been documented. Purpose: To examine the prevalence and 2-year operative success rate of meniscal repairs in the revision ACL setting. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: All cases of revision ACL reconstruction with concomitant meniscal repair from a multicenter group between 2006 and 2011 were selected. Two-year follow-up was obtained by phone and email to determine whether any subsequent surgery had occurred to either knee since the initial revision ACL reconstruction. If so, operative reports were obtained, whenever possible, to verify the pathologic condition and subsequent treatment. Results: In total, 218 patients (18%) from 1205 revision ACL reconstructions underwent concurrent meniscal repairs. There were 235 repairs performed: 153 medial, 48 lateral, and 17 medial and lateral. The majority of these repairs (n = 178; 76%) were performed with all-inside techniques. Two-year surgical follow-up was obtained on 90% (197/218) of the cohort. Overall, the meniscal repair failure rate was 8.6% (17/197) at 2 years. Of the 17 failures, 15 were medial (13 all-inside, 2 inside-out) and 2 were lateral (both all-inside). Four medial failures were treated in conjunction with a subsequent repeat revision ACL reconstruction. Conclusion: Meniscal repair in the revision ACL reconstruction setting does not have a high failure rate at 2-year follow-up. Failure rates for medial and lateral repairs were both <10% and consistent with success rates of primary ACL reconstruction meniscal repair. Medial tears underwent reoperation for failure at a significantly higher rate than lateral tears.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Lateral Plasty in High-Risk Young Adolescents: Revisions, Subjective Evaluation, and the Role of Surgical Timing on Meniscal Preservation

2021 ◽  
pp. 194173812110144
Author(s):  
Alberto Grassi ◽  
Luca Macchiarola ◽  
Gian Andrea Lucidi ◽  
Giacomo Dal Fabbro ◽  
Massimilano Mosca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Revision Rate ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Lysholm Score ◽  
Meniscal Injury ◽  
Meniscal Lesions ◽  
Lateral Tenodesis ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: In adolescents, the rate of meniscal injury at the time of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, the rate of ACL graft revision, and clinical outcomes has not yet been investigated. Hypothesis: In patients younger than 16 years, the rate of meniscal injuries at the time of ACL reconstruction increases with time from injury. The mid-term revision rate and reoperation rate after ACL reconstruction with hamstrings and lateral tenodesis are lower than those reported in literature for isolate ACL reconstruction. Study Design: Case series. Level of Evidence: Level 4. Methods: Patients younger than 16 years who underwent ACL reconstruction with hamstring and lateral tenodesis, with a follow-up ≥2 years were included. The number of meniscal lesions was stratified according to the delay between injury-to-surgery (<3, 3-12, >12 months). All reoperations, Lysholm score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscales for pain (at rest and during activity), and return to sport were collected. Results: A total of 151 patients (mean age 14.8 ± 1.2 years) were included. Patients undergoing surgery at <3 months after injury had a lower meniscal injury rate (36%) than those treated at 3 to 12 months (55%) and >12 months (63%) after injury ( P = 0.04). Medial meniscal lesions were more likely to be repaired when surgery was performed <3 months after injury (91%). Subjective follow-up data were available for 132 patients, and 19 were lost to follow-up. At 6.0 ± 2.6 years, 6% of patients underwent ACL revision; 1 of 20 (5%) patients with posterior tibial slope ≥12° and 4 of 45 (9%) patients with Tegner level ≥8. Nine new meniscal procedures were performed; 19% of repaired menisci underwent meniscectomy. Good or excellent Lysholm score was reported by 88% of patients; 56% of patients with concurrent lateral meniscectomy had pain during activity, 91% returned to sport, and 79% were still participating at final follow-up. Conclusion: Patients younger than 16 years undergoing ACL reconstruction within 3 months from injury had the lowest rate of meniscal injuries. ACL reconstruction with lateral tenodesis had low revision rate (6%) and good or excellent clinical outcomes in 88% of young adolescents. Clinical Relevance: Sport physicians should be aware that adolescent patients undergoing ACL reconstruction within 3 months after injury have the lowest rate of meniscal injuries; the mid-term revision rate of ACL reconstruction with lateral plasty is lower than 10% and the patients’ perceived outcomes are good with almost all patients returning to sport activity.

Twenty-Year Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Prospectively Collected Data

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652110273
Author(s):  
Joshua S. Everhart ◽  
Sercan Yalcin ◽  
Kurt P. Spindler
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Knee Function ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Several long-term (≥20 years) follow-up studies after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction have been published in recent years, allowing for a systematic evaluation of outcomes. Purpose: To summarize outcomes at ≥20 years after ACL reconstruction and identify patient and surgical factors that affect these results. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Prospective studies of primary ACL reconstructions with hamstring or bone–patellar tendon—bone (BTB) autograft via an arthroscopic or a mini-open technique and with a mean follow-up of ≥20 years were identified. When possible, the mean scores for each outcome measure were calculated. Factors identified in individual studies as predictive of outcomes were described. Results: Five studies met the inclusion and exclusion criteria with a total of 2012 patients. The pooled mean follow-up for patient-reported outcome measures was 44.2% (range, 29.6%-92.7%) and in-person evaluation was 33.2% (range, 29.6%-48.9%). Four studies (n = 584) reported graft tears at a mean rate of 11.8% (range, 2%-18.5%) and 4 studies (n = 773) reported a contralateral ACL injury rate of 12.2% (range, 5.8%-30%). Repeat non-ACL arthroscopic surgery (4 studies; n = 177) to the ipsilateral knee occurred in 10.4% (range, 9.5%-18.3%) and knee arthroplasty (1 study; n = 217) in 5%. The pooled mean of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee function (IKDC) score was 79.1 (SD, 21.8 [3 studies; n = 644]). In 2 studies (n?= 221), 57.5% of patients continued to participate in strenuous activities. The IKDC-objective score was normal or nearly normal in 82.3% (n = 496; 3 studies), with low rates of clinically significant residual laxity. Moderate-severe radiographic osteoarthritis (OA) (IKDC grade C or D) was present in 25.9% of patients (n = 605; 3 studies). Medial meniscectomy is associated with increased risk of radiographic OA. Radiographic OA severity is associated with worse patient-reported knee function, but the association with knee pain is unclear. Conclusion: Currently available prospective evidence for ACL reconstruction with hamstring or BTB autograft provides several insights into outcomes at 20 years. The rates of follow-up at 20 years range from 30% to 93%. IKDC-objective scores were normal or nearly normal in 82% and the mean IKDC-subjective score was 79 points.

scholarly journals Primary ACL Repair vs Reconstruction: Investigating the Current Conventional Wisdom

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (6_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967118S0004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriella Bucci ◽  
Michael Begg ◽  
Kevin Pillifant ◽  
Steven B. Singleton
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Sports Medicine ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Conventional Wisdom ◽  
Acl Repair ◽  
Arthroscopic Technique ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Injured Knee

BACKGROUND: “Why try to convert other collagen substitutes into ligament if the original can be preserved?” said Sherman1. Nowadays, reconstruction became the gold standard treatment for ACL injuries. Despite current treatment, secondary knee osteoarthritis has been described in more than 70% of the injured patients after 10 years follow up.2 Recent studies have reported that tears involving the proximal ACL have an intrinsic healing response. This response has been compared to the one observed in MCL injuries.3, 4. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to initiate a scientific analysis of our experience in patients diagnosed with an acute, proximal ACL tear treated with a primary repair arthroscopic technique. We suggest the creation of a symposium that reconsiders the ACL repair as a tool for treatment, on a selected subset of patients. METHODS: We analyzed retrospectively the data of 12 consecutive patients diagnosed clinically and radiologically (MRI) with proximal ACL tears in our clinic. The inclusion criteria were: proximal ACL tear (type 1 tear in Sherman´s classification), good remaining ACL quality tissue and less than 3 months from injury. The mean age at time of surgery was 33 years (16 to 55). Patients included in this study are athletes either at an amateur or professional level. The technique consists of an anatomical reinsertion of native ACL by reinforcing the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles of the ACL with a series of high strength locking Bunnell-type sutures, moving up the ligament from distal to proximal with an arthroscopic suture passer. The normal ACL insertional footprint within the notch is then debrided to provide a bleeding surface for healing. Finally, the torn ligament is opposed to the native footprint using 1-2 absorbable anchors that recreate the anatomic bundle insertional sites of the native ACL. RESULTS: Associated injuries were found in 7 of the 12 patients, these included 4 knees with lateral and 1 with medial meniscal tear which were repaired in the same procedure. Also, one knee had a medial bucket handle tear, partial meniscectomy was performed, and one knee with a combined ACL/MCL injury in which the MCL was simultaneously repaired. In our ongoing series, were excluded patients that had sustained complex knee injuries with multi-ligament damage (except ACL/MCL injuries), those with ACL re-ruptures, and previous knee surgery with cartilage repair procedures. Validated functional outcomes scores were collected after a mean follow up of 20 months (14-26). For the IKDC subjective score 11 of 12 patients rated their knees as normal or nearly normal. Lachman and Pivot Shift was negative in all patients. Lysholm score postoperatively averaged 93.5 ± 7; preoperatively 48 ± 7. Tegner preinjury 7.5 ± 1.2 postinjury: 7 ± 1.4. The KT-1000 knee arthrometer, objectively measured < 3 mm of anterior tibial motion relative to the femur in the injured knee compared to the non-injured knee at all levels of force, including manual max tests, in all patients included in the study. No complications or further surgeries are reported up to date. CONCLUSION: The keys to success include: Proper patient selection, early intervention, all arthroscopic technique, appropriate suture control of the torn ACL fibers, and stable opposition to a bleeding bone surface at the native attachment site within the femoral notch. Long-term data is pending. However, basic science and early clinical studies are promising. REFERENCES Mark F. Sherman, MD, Lawernce Lieber, MD, Joel R. Bonamo, MD, Luga Podesta, MD, Ira Reiter, RPT., The long-term followup of primary anterior cruciate ligament repair, 1991, The American Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 19, No 3. Martha M. Murray, MD. Current Status and Potential for Primary ACL Repair. 2009. Clin Ssports Med. Duy Tan Nguyen, Tamara H. Ramwadhdoebe, Cor P. van der Hart, Leendert Blankervoort, Paul Peter Tak, Cornelis Niek van Dijk., Intrinsic Healing Response of the Human Anterior Cruciate Ligament: An Histological Study of Reattached ACL Remnants, 2014, Journal of Orthopaedic Research. Martha M. Murray, MD, Braden C. Fleming, Ph.D., Use of a Bioactive Scaffold to Stimulate ACL Healing Also Minimizes Post-traumatic Osteoarthritis after Surgery, 2014, American Journal of Sports Medicine. Primary ACL Repair vs Reconstruction: Investigating the Current Conventional Wisdom

scholarly journals GRAFT CHOICE FOR ADOLESCENT ATHLETES RETURNING TO HIGH-RISK SPORTS: A MATCHED COHORT ANALYSIS OF PATELLAR TENDON AND HAMSTRING AUTOGRAFTS

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0007
Author(s):  
Crystal Perkins ◽  
Michael Busch ◽  
Melissa Christino ◽  
Belinda Schaafsma ◽  
S. Clifton Willimon
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Acl Reconstruction ◽  
Patellar Tendon ◽  
Graft Failure ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Graft Rupture ◽  
Graft Choice ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Graft selection for skeletally mature adolescents undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is guided by surgeon and patient preference. In young patients returning to high-risk cutting and pivoting sports, graft rupture is the most feared complication of ACL reconstruction. Some studies have demonstrated slightly lower rates of graft failure and decreased laxity in the short term associated with patellar tendon (BTB) autografts as compared to hamstring (HS) autografts, but these studies are limited by their heterogeneity of ages and activity level1-3. The purpose of this study is to compare the rates of graft failure between BTB and HS ACL reconstruction cohorts matched by age, sex, and sport. Methods: A single-institution retrospective review was performed of consecutive patients less than 19 years of age treated with ACL reconstructions using either patellar tendon (BTB) or hamstring (HS) autograft performed by a single surgeon. Skeletally mature or nearly mature patients in “high-risk” ACL injury sports (basketball, football, soccer, lacrosse, and gymnastics) were initially treated with hamstring autografts but the graft preference transitioned to BTB autografts as the preferred graft choice during the study period. This transition in graft preference for adolescents participating in “high risk” sports allows for a comparison of outcomes based on graft types. Inclusion criteria were ages 13 – 18 years, participation in a “high risk” sport, and minimum 6-month follow-up. The two cohorts of patients were matched by age, gender, and sport. The primary outcome measure was graft rupture. Results: One hundred fifty-two patients with an average age of 16 years (range 13 – 18 years) underwent ACL reconstruction during the study period. There were 71 BTB reconstructions and 81 HS reconstructions. There were 64 females and 88 males. There was no difference in age, sex, BMI, or laterality between groups. There were more patients who played soccer in the BTB cohort (44%) vs HS cohort (20%) and fewer who played basketball in the BTB cohort (24%) vs HS cohort (41%), p = 0.005. There were no differences between the BTB and HS cohorts in terms of meniscus tears (61% v 72%, p = 0.15), meniscus repair (21% v 32%, p = 0.13), or partial meniscectomy (32% v 33%, p = 0.90). Mean duration of follow-up was 28 months (range 7-57 months). There was no difference in follow-up between cohorts (BTB 28 months and HS 29 months, p = 0.19). There were a total of 16 graft ruptures (10.5%). There was no difference in the rate of graft rupture between cohorts (BTB 8.5% vs HS 12.3%, p = 0.60). Mean time to graft rupture was 21 months (range 8 – 35 months) and Kaplan-Meier survival curves demonstrated no difference between cohorts. Conclusions: ACL reconstruction in adolescents returning to high-risk sports can be performed utilizing BTB or HS autografts with similar rates of graft rupture. There is a trend toward lower rates of graft rupture associated with BTB autografts, but additional patients will be necessary to determine if this trend will become a statistically significant difference. Beynnon BD, Johnson RJ, Fleming BC, et al. Anterior cruciate ligament replacement: comparison of bone-patellar tendon bone grafts with two-strand hamstring grafts. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002;84(9):1503-1513. Ho B, Edmonds EW, Chambers HG et al. Risk factors for early ACL reconstruction failure in pediatric and adolescent patients: a review of 561 cases. J Pediatr Orthop 2016. Samuelsen BT, Webster KE, Johnson NR, et al. Hamstring autograft versus patellar tendon autograft for ACL reconstruction: is there a difference in graft failure rate? A meta-analysis of 47,613 patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2017;475(10):2459-2468.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document