Literature DB >> 24322979

Increased risk of revision with hamstring tendon grafts compared with patellar tendon grafts after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a study of 12,643 patients from the Norwegian Cruciate Ligament Registry, 2004-2012.

Andreas Persson1, Knut Fjeldsgaard, Jan-Erik Gjertsen, Asle B Kjellsen, Lars Engebretsen, Randi M Hole, Jonas M Fevang.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is controversial. Hamstring tendon (HT) autografts and patellar tendon (PT) autografts are the most common grafts used and have shown similar subjective and objective outcomes.
PURPOSE: To compare the revision rate between HT and PT autografts used in ACLR in Norway and to estimate the influence of patient age and sex. STUDY
DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.
METHODS: The study included all patients who underwent primary ACLR without concomitant ligament injuries registered in the Norwegian Knee Ligament Registry from 2004 through 2012. The cohort was stratified by age group (15-19, 20-29, and ≥30 years) and autograft type (HT or PT). Revision rates at 1, 2, and 5 years were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier analysis, and hazard ratios (HRs) for revision were calculated using multivariate Cox regression models.
RESULTS: With a mean follow-up of 4.0 years, 12,643 primary ACLRs were identified, with 3428 PT and 9215 HT grafts, among which 69 revisions with PT grafts and 362 revisions with HT grafts were performed. The overall 5-year revision rate was 4.2%. A higher revision rate was recorded for HT versus PT grafts at all follow-up times. When adjusted for sex, age, and type of graft, the HR for revision was 2.3 (95% CI, 1.8-3.0) for HT grafts compared with PT grafts. The HR for revision in the youngest age group was 4.0 (95% CI, 3.1-5.2) compared with the oldest age group. Sex had no effect on the revision rate.
CONCLUSION: Patients with HT grafts had twice the risk of revision compared with patients with PT grafts. Younger age was the most important risk factor for revision, and no effect was seen for sex. Further studies should be conducted to identify the cause of the increased revision rate found for HT grafts.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ACL; graft; hamstring tendon; patellar tendon; reconstruction; revision

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24322979     DOI: 10.1177/0363546513511419

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  86 in total

1.  Predictors for additional anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: data from the Swedish national ACL register.

Authors:  Anne Fältström; Martin Hägglund; Henrik Magnusson; Magnus Forssblad; Joanna Kvist
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-11-01       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Feasibility of establishing an Australian ACL registry: a pilot study by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR).

Authors:  Christina Lekkas; Richard Clarnette; Stephen E Graves; Sophia Rainbird; David Parker; Michelle Lorimer; Roger Paterson; Justin Roe; Hayden Morris; Julian A Feller; Peter Annear; Ben Forster; David Hayes
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-02-14       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  Does Combined Intra- and Extraarticular ACL Reconstruction Improve Function and Stability? A Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Fernando Cury Rezende; Vinicius Ynoe de Moraes; Ana Luiza Cabrera Martimbianco; Marcus Vinícius Luzo; Carlos Eduardo da Silveira Franciozi; João Carlos Belloti
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: how do we perform it? Brazilian orthopedic surgeons' preference.

Authors:  Luiz Felipe Morlin Ambra; Fernando Cury Rezende; Bruno Xavier; Felipe Conrado Shumaker; Carlos Eduardo da Silveira Franciozi; Marcos Vinicius Malheiros Luzo
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Lack of consensus regarding pretensioning and preconditioning protocols for soft tissue graft reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament.

Authors:  Kyle A Jisa; Brady T Williams; Jeffrey R Jaglowski; Travis Lee Turnbull; Robert F LaPrade; Coen A Wijdicks
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-02-26       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Femoral-tibial fixation affects risk of revision and reoperation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring autograft.

Authors:  Lindsey M Spragg; Heather A Prentice; Andrew Morris; Tadashi T Funahashi; Gregory B Maletis; Rick P Csintalan
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Risk of Revision Was Not Reduced by a Double-bundle ACL Reconstruction Technique: Results From the Scandinavian Registers.

Authors:  Cathrine Aga; Jüri-Tomas Kartus; Martin Lind; Stein Håkon Låstad Lygre; Lars-Petter Granan; Lars Engebretsen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Low re-rupture rate with BPTB autograft and semitendinosus gracilis autograft with preserved insertions in ACL reconstruction surgery in sports persons.

Authors:  Ravi Gupta; Munish Sood; Anubhav Malhotra; Gladson David Masih; Anil Kapoor; Mukta Raghav; Mehar Dhillon
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 9.  Should Return to Sport be Delayed Until 2 Years After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction? Biological and Functional Considerations.

Authors:  Christopher V Nagelli; Timothy E Hewett
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 11.136

10.  A Secondary Injury Prevention Program May Decrease Contralateral Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries in Female Athletes: 2-Year Injury Rates in the ACL-SPORTS Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Jessica L Johnson; Jacob J Capin; Amelia J H Arundale; Ryan Zarzycki; Angela H Smith; Lynn Snyder-Mackler
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 4.751

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.