Seung-Hyun Yoo1, Eun-Kyoo Song1, Young-Rok Shin1, Sung-Kyu Kim1, Jong-Keun Seon2. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Center for Joint Disease, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, 160 Ilsimri, Hwasun-eup, Hwasun-gun, Jeollanamdo, 519-809, South Korea. 2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Center for Joint Disease, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, 160 Ilsimri, Hwasun-eup, Hwasun-gun, Jeollanamdo, 519-809, South Korea. seonbell@jnu.ac.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective randomized clinical study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes, including tibial tunnel widening and the progression of osteoarthritis after ACL reconstruction using a hamstring autograft or a tibialis allograft. In addition, we compared the graft tear and synovial coverage of grafts in patients that underwent the second-look arthroscopy. METHODS: Among 184 patients with an ACL injury who underwent ACL reconstruction, 68 patients of autograft group and 64 patients of tibialis allograft group were included for this study after minimum of 2-year follow-up. The Lachman and pivot-shift tests, Tegner activity score, Lysholm knee score, and IKDC score were compared between the two groups. The quadriceps and hamstring isokinetic strengths using dynamometer were also compared. Degree of OA was determined using the Kellgren-Lawrence grading system on the weight-bearing radiographs. In total, 51 patients (26 patients in autograft group and 25 in the tibialis allograft group) underwent the second-look arthroscopy, in which we compared the apparent tear of graft and synovial coverage of grafts. RESULTS: At the final follow-up, there were no statistical significances in the two groups in Lachman and pivot-shift tests (n.s.). The Tegner activity, Lysholm knee score, and IKDC scores were similar in the two groups. Moreover, no significant differences were observed in the muscle power (n.s.). Some patients showed the progression of OA (five in autograft and four in allograft groups) without intergroup difference (n.s.). Regarding the findings of second-look arthroscopy, although there was no significant difference in graft tear, synovial coverage was better in autograft group than in allograft group. CONCLUSION: Even though hamstring autografts and tibialis allografts provided good functional outcomes without significant differences, the second-look arthroscopy revealed that hamstring autografts produced better synovial coverage than tibialis allograft. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this prospective randomized clinical study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes, including tibial tunnel widening and the progression of osteoarthritis after ACL reconstruction using a hamstring autograft or a tibialis allograft. In addition, we compared the graft tear and synovial coverage of grafts in patients that underwent the second-look arthroscopy. METHODS: Among 184 patients with an ACL injury who underwent ACL reconstruction, 68 patients of autograft group and 64 patients of tibialis allograft group were included for this study after minimum of 2-year follow-up. The Lachman and pivot-shift tests, Tegner activity score, Lysholm knee score, and IKDC score were compared between the two groups. The quadriceps and hamstring isokinetic strengths using dynamometer were also compared. Degree of OA was determined using the Kellgren-Lawrence grading system on the weight-bearing radiographs. In total, 51 patients (26 patients in autograft group and 25 in the tibialis allograft group) underwent the second-look arthroscopy, in which we compared the apparent tear of graft and synovial coverage of grafts. RESULTS: At the final follow-up, there were no statistical significances in the two groups in Lachman and pivot-shift tests (n.s.). The Tegner activity, Lysholm knee score, and IKDC scores were similar in the two groups. Moreover, no significant differences were observed in the muscle power (n.s.). Some patients showed the progression of OA (five in autograft and four in allograft groups) without intergroup difference (n.s.). Regarding the findings of second-look arthroscopy, although there was no significant difference in graft tear, synovial coverage was better in autograft group than in allograft group. CONCLUSION: Even though hamstring autografts and tibialis allografts provided good functional outcomes without significant differences, the second-look arthroscopy revealed that hamstring autografts produced better synovial coverage than tibialis allograft. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.
Authors: Jong Keun Seon; Sang Jin Park; Keun Bae Lee; Hyoung Yeon Seo; Myung Sun Kim; Eun Kyoo Song Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2010-09-16 Impact factor: 6.202