Literature DB >> 18183370

The extracellular remodeling of free-soft-tissue autografts and allografts for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: a comparison study in a sheep model.

M Dustmann1, T Schmidt, I Gangey, F N Unterhauser, A Weiler, S U Scheffler.   

Abstract

Our study was aimed to advance the currently limited knowledge about differences in the biological remodeling of free soft-tissue tendon allografts and autografts for ACL reconstruction. Allogenic and autologous ACL reconstructions were performed in a sheep model using the flexor digitalis superficialis tendon. After 6, 12 and 52 weeks the animals were sacrificed. We analyzed the collagen crimp formation and its relationship to expression of contractile myofibroblasts in both graft types. Additionally, structural properties and ap-laxity were compared during biomechanical testing. At 6 weeks only descriptive differences were found between autografts and allografts with a more organized crimp pattern and myofibroblast distribution in autografts. Significant differences in myofibroblast density and crimp formation were found after 12 weeks. At these early stages, the progress of remodeling in autografts was more advanced toward the central areas than in allografts. At 1 year, grafts in both study groups returned to an ACL-similar structure. Structural properties and ap-laxity did not vary significantly between auto- and allografts at early healing stages. However, at 52 weeks, failure loads, stiffness and ap-drawer test showed superior values for autograft ACL reconstruction. Extracellular remodeling of allografts develops slower than in autografts. Therefore, rehabilitation procedures will have to be adapted according to graft and patient selection. Postoperative treatment regimens from autograft primary ACL reconstruction should not be directly transferred to allograft ACL reconstructions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18183370     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-007-0471-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  43 in total

1.  Assessment of morbidity of semitendinosus and gracilis tendon harvest for ACL reconstruction.

Authors:  P T Simonian; S D Harrison; V J Cooley; E M Escabedo; D A Deneka; R V Larson
Journal:  Am J Knee Surg       Date:  1997

2.  The biomechanical effects of low-dose irradiation on bone-patellar tendon-bone allografts.

Authors:  Andrew R Curran; Douglas J Adams; Julie L Gill; Mark E Steiner; Arnold D Scheller
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2004-05-18       Impact factor: 6.202

3.  Cross-sectional area measurements for tendon specimens: a comparison of several methods.

Authors:  D G Ellis
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1969-05       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  [Primary- and revision-reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with allografts: a retrospective study including 325 patients].

Authors:  R Siebold; J U Buelow; L Boes; A Ellermann
Journal:  Zentralbl Chir       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 0.942

5.  Allograft versus autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: 3- to 5-year outcome.

Authors:  C D Harner; E Olson; J J Irrgang; S Silverstein; F H Fu; M Silbey
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Fibroblast traction as a mechanism for collagen morphogenesis.

Authors:  A K Harris; D Stopak; P Wild
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1981-03-19       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  Arthroscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. A comparison of patellar tendon autograft and four-strand hamstring tendon autograft.

Authors:  I S Corry; J M Webb; A J Clingeleffer; L A Pinczewski
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 6.202

8.  Cryopreserved anterior cruciate ligament allografts in a canine model.

Authors:  J S Kirkpatrick; A V Seaber; R R Glisson; F H Bassett
Journal:  J South Orthop Assoc       Date:  1996

9.  Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with human allograft. Comparison of early and later results.

Authors:  F R Noyes; S D Barber-Westin
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 10.  A meta-analysis of stability of autografts compared to allografts after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Chadwick Prodromos; Brian Joyce; Kelvin Shi
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2007-04-17       Impact factor: 4.114

View more
  37 in total

1.  The anatomic approach to primary, revision and augmentation anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Carola F van Eck; Verena M Schreiber; T Thomas Liu; Freddie H Fu
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Repopulation of intrasynovial flexor tendon allograft with bone marrow stromal cells: an ex vivo model.

Authors:  Yasuhiro Ozasa; Peter C Amadio; Andrew R Thoreson; Kai-Nan An; Chunfeng Zhao
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 3.845

3.  Four-strand hamstring tendon autograft versus LARS artificial ligament for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Zhong-tang Liu; Xian-long Zhang; Yao Jiang; Bing-Fang Zeng
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2009-04-25       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Sex Influences the Biomechanical Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in a Preclinical Large Animal Model.

Authors:  Ata M Kiapour; Braden C Fleming; Benedikt L Proffen; Martha M Murray
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 6.202

5.  Tibiofemoral compression force differences using laxity- and force-based initial graft tensioning techniques in the anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed cadaveric knee.

Authors:  Braden C Fleming; Mark F Brady; Michael P Bradley; Rahul Banerjee; Michael J Hulstyn; Paul D Fadale
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2008-06-30       Impact factor: 4.772

6.  Comparison between hamstring autograft and free tendon Achilles allograft: minimum 2-year follow-up after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using EndoButton and Intrafix.

Authors:  Jung Ho Noh; Seung Rim Yi; Sang Jun Song; Seong Wan Kim; Woo Kim
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-02-03       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Three-dimensional engineered bone-ligament-bone constructs for anterior cruciate ligament replacement.

Authors:  Jinjin Ma; Michael J Smietana; Tatiana Y Kostrominova; Edward M Wojtys; Lisa M Larkin; Ellen M Arruda
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 3.845

8.  Allogeneic versus autologous derived cell sources for use in engineered bone-ligament-bone grafts in sheep anterior cruciate ligament repair.

Authors:  Vasudevan D Mahalingam; Nilofar Behbahani-Nejad; Storm V Horine; Tyler J Olsen; Michael J Smietana; Edward M Wojtys; Deneen M Wellik; Ellen M Arruda; Lisa M Larkin
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part A       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 3.845

9.  Hamstring autograft maturation is superior to tibialis allograft following anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Sang-Gyun Kim; Soo-Hyun Kim; Jae-Gyoon Kim; Ki-Mo Jang; Hong-Chul Lim; Ji-Hoon Bae
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 10.  Factors influencing the long-term behavior of extracellular matrix-derived scaffolds for musculoskeletal soft tissue repair.

Authors:  Christopher R Rowland; Dianne Little; Farshid Guilak
Journal:  J Long Term Eff Med Implants       Date:  2012
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.