Christopher D Joyce1, Kyle L Randall1, Michael W Mariscalco1, Robert A Magnussen1, David C Flanigan2. 1. The Ohio State University Sports Medicine Center and Cartilage Restoration Program, Columbus, Ohio, U.S.A. 2. The Ohio State University Sports Medicine Center and Cartilage Restoration Program, Columbus, Ohio, U.S.A.. Electronic address: david.flanigan@osumc.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the outcomes of bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and soft-tissue allografts in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with respect to graft failure risk, physical examination findings, instrumented laxity, and patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: A search of the PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) Complete, Cochrane Collaboration, and SPORTDiscus databases was performed. English-language studies with outcome data on primary ACL reconstruction with nonirradiated BPTB and soft-tissue allografts were identified. Outcome data included failure risk, physical examination findings, instrumented laxity measurements, and patient-reported outcome scores. RESULTS: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these studies, 11 reported on BPTB allografts exclusively, 5 reported on soft-tissue allografts exclusively, and 1 compared both types. The comparative study showed no difference in failure risk, Lachman grade, pivot-shift grade, instrumented laxity, or overall International Knee Documentation Committee score between the 2 allograft types. Data from all studies yielded a failure risk of 10.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.5% to 18.1%) in the soft-tissue group and 15.2% (95% CI, 11.3% to 19.6%) in the BPTB group. The risk of a Lachman grade greater than 5 mm was 6.4% (95% CI, 1.7% to 13.7%) in the soft-tissue group and 8.6% (95% CI, 6.3% to 11.2%) in the BPTB group. The risk of a grade 2 or 3 pivot shift was 1.4% (95% CI, 0.3% to 3.3%) in the soft-tissue group and 4.1% (95% CI, 1.9% to 7.2%) in the BPTB group. CONCLUSIONS: One comparative study showed no difference in results after ACL reconstruction with nonirradiated BPTB and soft-tissue allografts. Inclusion of case series in the analysis showed qualitatively similar outcomes with the 2 graft types.
PURPOSE: To describe the outcomes of bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and soft-tissue allografts in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with respect to graft failure risk, physical examination findings, instrumented laxity, and patient-reported outcomes. METHODS: A search of the PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) Complete, Cochrane Collaboration, and SPORTDiscus databases was performed. English-language studies with outcome data on primary ACL reconstruction with nonirradiated BPTB and soft-tissue allografts were identified. Outcome data included failure risk, physical examination findings, instrumented laxity measurements, and patient-reported outcome scores. RESULTS: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these studies, 11 reported on BPTB allografts exclusively, 5 reported on soft-tissue allografts exclusively, and 1 compared both types. The comparative study showed no difference in failure risk, Lachman grade, pivot-shift grade, instrumented laxity, or overall International Knee Documentation Committee score between the 2 allograft types. Data from all studies yielded a failure risk of 10.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.5% to 18.1%) in the soft-tissue group and 15.2% (95% CI, 11.3% to 19.6%) in the BPTB group. The risk of a Lachman grade greater than 5 mm was 6.4% (95% CI, 1.7% to 13.7%) in the soft-tissue group and 8.6% (95% CI, 6.3% to 11.2%) in the BPTB group. The risk of a grade 2 or 3 pivot shift was 1.4% (95% CI, 0.3% to 3.3%) in the soft-tissue group and 4.1% (95% CI, 1.9% to 7.2%) in the BPTB group. CONCLUSIONS: One comparative study showed no difference in results after ACL reconstruction with nonirradiated BPTB and soft-tissue allografts. Inclusion of case series in the analysis showed qualitatively similar outcomes with the 2 graft types.
Authors: Jennifer H Edwards; Anthony Herbert; Gemma L Jones; Iain W Manfield; John Fisher; Eileen Ingham Journal: J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater Date: 2016-09-23 Impact factor: 3.368