Literature DB >> 27466222

Irradiated Hamstring Tendon Allograft Versus Autograft for Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Midterm Clinical Outcomes.

Shaoqi Tian1, Bin Wang2, Lun Liu3, Yuanhe Wang3, Chengzhi Ha3, Qicai Li3, Xu Yang3, Kang Sun1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most studies on grafts for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) have been of autografts or nonirradiated allografts with a single-bundle (SB) technique. Outcome reports evaluating anatomic double-bundle (DB) ACLR with a hamstring tendon autograft versus irradiated allograft are rare.
PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic anatomic DB ACLR with a hamstring tendon autograft versus irradiated allograft. STUDY
DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.
METHODS: Between 2008 and 2009, a total of 107 patients undergoing arthroscopic DB ACLR were prospectively randomized consecutively into 1 of 2 groups (autograft [Auto] group and irradiated allograft [Ir-Allo] group). All the surgical procedures were performed by the same senior surgeon using the DB reconstruction technique. All irradiated hamstring tendon allografts were sterilized with 2.5 Mrad of irradiation before distribution and were obtained from a single certified tissue bank. Graft fixation on the femoral side was by an Endobutton, and on the tibial side by a bioabsorbable interference screw augmented with a staple. The same rehabilitation protocol was applied to all patients. Before surgery and at a mean of 6.9 years of follow-up, patients were evaluated by the same observer according to objective and subjective clinical evaluations including detailed history, physical examination, radiography, functional knee ligament testing, KT-2000 arthrometer testing, Harner vertical jump and Daniel 1-legged hop tests, Lysholm score, Tegner score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) standard evaluation form, and Cincinnati knee score.
RESULTS: A total of 83 patients (Auto: n = 40 [mean age, 29.2 ± 6.9 years]; Ir-Allo: n = 43 [mean age, 28.6 ± 7.2 years]) fulfilled follow-up and clinical evaluations. No significant differences were found between the 2 groups according to the overall IKDC functional and subjective evaluations as well as testing of activity levels. Significant between-group differences were found when comparing the results at final follow-up according to the Lachman test, anterior drawer test, pivot-shift test, and KT-2000 arthrometer measurements (P < .001). Most importantly, 87.5% of patients in the Auto group and 34.9% in the Ir-Allo group had a side-to-side difference <3 mm. The rate of laxity (side-to-side difference >5 mm) with an irradiated allograft (30.2%) was higher than that with an autograft (7.5%) (P < .001). The failure rate in the Ir-Allo group (30.2%) was higher than that in the Auto group (7.5%) (P < .001). Anterior and rotational stability decreased significantly in the Ir-Allo group; patients in the Ir-Allo group also had a shorter operation time. There were 10.0% (4/40) of patients in the Auto group and 32.6% (19/43) of patients in the Ir-Allo group who had arthritic progression (P < .05).
CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in postoperative activity levels and functional outcomes between the Auto and Ir-Allo groups. However, a significant increase in anterior and rotational laxity in the Ir-Allo group was found according to evaluations. We do not advocate an irradiated hamstring tendon allograft for DB ACLR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Register System of The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University (qdfy-ky2008-12).
© 2016 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  allograft; anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; double bundle; hamstring tendon; irradiation; prospective randomized study

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27466222     DOI: 10.1177/0363546516655333

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


  14 in total

Review 1.  Current trends in the anterior cruciate ligament part II: evaluation, surgical technique, prevention, and rehabilitation.

Authors:  Volker Musahl; Ian D Engler; Ehab M Nazzal; Jonathan F Dalton; Gian Andrea Lucidi; Jonathan D Hughes; Stefano Zaffagnini; Francesco Della Villa; James J Irrgang; Freddie H Fu; Jon Karlsson
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-12-05       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is better than single-bundle reconstruction in terms of objective assessment but not in terms of subjective score.

Authors:  Faisal Ahmed Hashem El-Sherief; Wael Abdelkarim Aldahshan; Yaser Elsayed Wahd; Ashraf Mohamed Abdelaziz; Hany Abdel Gawwad Soliman; Tohamy Goda Hassan; Hassan Fathy Elbehairy; Adel Hamed Awadallah
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-11-20       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Pectoralis Major Tear with Retracted Tendon: How to Fill the Gap? Reconstruction with Hamstring Autograft and Fixation with an Interference Screw.

Authors:  L Baverel; K Messedi; G Piétu; V Crenn; F Gouin
Journal:  Case Rep Orthop       Date:  2017-01-30

4.  Adolescent Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Comparison of the Use of Autograft Versus Allograft Hamstring.

Authors:  Nikhil Kumar; Tracey P Bastrom; M Morgan Dennis; Andrew T Pennock; Eric W Edmonds
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2018-05-24

5.  Effects of graft preconditioning on γ-irradiated deep frozen tendon allografts used in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Xiaozuo Zheng; Wei Xu; Juyuan Gu; Yang Hu; Meijuan Cui; Yu-E Feng; Shijun Gao
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2018-06-21       Impact factor: 2.447

6.  Passive anterior tibia translation in anterior cruciate ligament-injured, anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed and healthy knees: a systematic review.

Authors:  M N J Keizer; E Otten
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2018-10-16

Review 7.  Comparative Efficacy of Graft Options in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Zhuomao Mo; Dong Li; Binbin Yang; Shujie Tang
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2020-09-25

Review 8.  Allograft for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Long-Term Comparative Effectiveness and Safety. Results of a Health Technology Assessment.

Authors:  Gregor Goetz; Cecilia de Villiers; Patrick Sadoghi; Sabine Geiger-Gritsch
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2020-11-13

9.  The potential of using semitendinosus tendon as autograft in rabbit meniscus reconstruction.

Authors:  Chenxi Li; Xiaoqing Hu; Qingyang Meng; Xin Zhang; Jingxian Zhu; Linghui Dai; Jin Cheng; Mingjin Zhong; Weili Shi; Bo Ren; Jiying Zhang; Xin Fu; Xiaoning Duan; Yingfang Ao
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Clinical outcomes and second-look arthroscopic findings of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autograft, hybrid graft, and allograft.

Authors:  Xiaozuo Zheng; Yang Hu; Peng Xie; Tong Li; Yu-E Feng; Juyuan Gu; Shijun Gao
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 2.359

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.