Literature DB >> 12208905

Anterior cruciate ligament replacement: comparison of bone-patellar tendon-bone grafts with two-strand hamstring grafts. A prospective, randomized study.

Bruce D Beynnon1, Robert J Johnson, Braden C Fleming, Pekka Kannus, Michael Kaplan, John Samani, Per Renström.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate replacement of a torn anterior cruciate ligament with either a bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft or a two-strand semitendinosus-gracilis autograft to compare the results of clinical testing, patient satisfaction, activity level, functional status, and muscle strength.
METHODS: Fifty-six patients with a torn anterior cruciate ligament were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Twenty-eight underwent reconstruction with a bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft, and twenty-eight were treated with a two-strand semitendinosus-gracilis autograft. Patients were followed for an average of thirty-nine months (range, thirty-six to fifty-seven months). At the time of final follow-up, twenty-two patients in each group were evaluated in terms of clinical test findings, patient satisfaction, activity level, functional status, and isokinetic muscle strength.
RESULTS: The objective outcome of replacement of the torn anterior cruciate ligament with a bone-patellar tendon-bone graft was superior to that obtained with a two-strand semitendinosus-gracilis graft. At the three-year follow-up interval, the patients in whom a hamstring graft had been used had an average of 4.4 mm of increased anterior knee laxity compared with the laxity of the contralateral, normal knee, whereas the patients in whom a bone-patellar tendon-bone graft had been used had an average of 1.1 mm of increased knee laxity. Fourteen percent (three) of the twenty-two patients with a hamstring graft had a mild pivot shift, and 27% (six) had a moderate pivot shift. Only 14% (three) of the twenty-two patients with a bone-patellar tendon-bone graft had a mild pivot shift, and none had a moderate pivot shift. At the same follow-up interval, the patients in whom a hamstring graft had been used had significantly lower peak knee-flexion strength than those who had a bone-patellar tendon-bone graft (p = 0.039). In contrast, the two treatments produced similar outcomes in terms of patient satisfaction, activity level, and knee function (ability to perform a one-legged hop, bear weight, squat, climb stairs, run in place, and duckwalk).
CONCLUSIONS: After three years of follow-up, the objective results of anterior cruciate ligament replacement with a bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft were superior to those of replacement with a two-strand semitendinosus-gracilis graft with regard to knee laxity, pivot-shift grade, and strength of the knee flexor muscles. However, the two groups had comparable results in terms of patient satisfaction, activity level, and knee function.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12208905     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200209000-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  92 in total

1.  Long-term follow-up of patellar tendon grafts or hamstring tendon grafts in endoscopic ACL reconstructions.

Authors:  Tone Gifstad; Anita Sole; Torbjørn Strand; Gisle Uppheim; Torbjørn Grøntvedt; Jon Olav Drogset
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Double-bundle reconstruction results in superior clinical outcome than single-bundle reconstruction.

Authors:  Ying Zhu; Ren-Kuan Tang; Peng Zhao; Shi-Sheng Zhu; Yong-Guo Li; Jian-Bo Li
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  What is the best femoral fixation of hamstring autografts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alexis Colvin; Charu Sharma; Michael Parides; Jonathan Glashow
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Health-related quality of life after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Olle Månsson; Jüri Kartus; Ninni Sernert
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in females: a comparison of hamstring tendon and patellar tendon autografts.

Authors:  Rainer Siebold; Kate E Webster; Julian A Feller; Alasdair G Sutherland; Johanna Elliott
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-06-07       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Quantitative evaluation of anterior tibial translation during isokinetic motion in knees with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using either patellar or hamstring tendon grafts.

Authors:  N Sato; H Higuchi; M Terauchi; M Kimura; K Takagishi
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2005-08-02       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  ACL reconstruction: patellar tendon versus hamstring grafts--economical aspects.

Authors:  Magnus Forssblad; Anders Valentin; Björn Engström; Suzanne Werner
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-03-29       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  A prospective comparison of bone-patellar tendon-bone and hamstring tendon grafts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in male patients.

Authors:  Gauti Laxdal; Ninni Sernert; Lars Ejerhed; Jon Karlsson; Jüri T Kartus
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2006-09-09       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Effect of surgery to implant motion and force sensors on vertical ground reaction forces in the ovine model.

Authors:  Safa T Herfat; Jason T Shearn; Denis L Bailey; R Michael Greiwe; Marc T Galloway; Cindi Gooch; David L Butler
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 2.097

10.  Differences in the rehabilitation period following two methods of anterior cruciate ligament replacement: semitendinosus/gracilis tendon vs. ligamentum patellae.

Authors:  Tim Rose; Thomas Engel; Joachim Bernhard; Pierre Hepp; Christoph Josten; Helmut Lill
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2003-09-26       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.