Armin Runer1,2, Guido Wierer1,3, Elmar Herbst1,4, Caroline Hepperger1, Mirco Herbort5, Peter Gföller6, Christian Hoser1, Christian Fink1,7. 1. Gelenkpunkt, Sport- and Joint Surgery, Olympiastrasse 36, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. 2. Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria. 3. Department of Traumatology and Sports Injuries, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria. 4. Department for Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany. 5. Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Westphalian Wilhelms University Muenster, Muenster, Germany. 6. Gelenkpunkt, Sport- and Joint Surgery, Olympiastrasse 36, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. p.gfoeller@gelenkpunkt.com. 7. ISAG - Institute for Sports Medicine, Alpine Medicine and Health Tourism/UMIT, Hall in Tirol, Austria.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is crucial, however the optimal graft source remains a topic of controversy. The purpose of this study is to compare subjective and functional patient-reported outcomes (PRO) after single-bundle ACL reconstruction using quadriceps tendon (QT) or hamstring tendon (HT) autografts for single-bundle ACL reconstruction. We hypothesize that there is no difference in patient-reported functional outcomes after ACL reconstruction using either HT- or QT autograft. METHODS: All data were extracted from a prospectively collected ACL registry. A total of 80 patients with at least 2-year follow-up were included in this study. A total of 40 patients with primary ACL reconstruction using a QT autograft harvested via a minimally invasive technique were matched by sex, age and pre-injury Tegner and Lysholm score to 40 patients who received HT autografts. Subjective and functional PRO scores including Lysholm score, Tegner activity level and visual analogue scale for pain were obtained at 6, 12 and 24 months after index surgery. RESULTS: No significant difference between the QT and the HT group was seen at any follow-up in regard to any of the PRO scores for function or pain. 24 months post-surgery the mean Tegner activity score of the HT group was significantly (p = 0.04) lower compared to the pre-injury status. At final follow-up, 27 patients (67.5%) in the QT group and 32 patients (80.0%) in the HT returned to their pre-injury activity level (n.s.). A total of 37 patients (92.5%) of the QT cohort and 35 patients (87.5%) of the HT cohort reported "good" or "excellent" results according to the Lysholm score (n.s.). "No pain" or "slight pain" during severe exertion was reported by 33 patients (82.5%) with QT autograft and 28 patients (82.4%) with HT autograft (n.s.). CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference between PRO 2 years post-operative using either QT or HT autografts. Both QT and HT grafts show acceptable and comparable PRO scores making the QT a reliable graft alternative to HT for primary ACL reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
PURPOSE: Graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is crucial, however the optimal graft source remains a topic of controversy. The purpose of this study is to compare subjective and functional patient-reported outcomes (PRO) after single-bundle ACL reconstruction using quadriceps tendon (QT) or hamstring tendon (HT) autografts for single-bundle ACL reconstruction. We hypothesize that there is no difference in patient-reported functional outcomes after ACL reconstruction using either HT- or QT autograft. METHODS: All data were extracted from a prospectively collected ACL registry. A total of 80 patients with at least 2-year follow-up were included in this study. A total of 40 patients with primary ACL reconstruction using a QT autograft harvested via a minimally invasive technique were matched by sex, age and pre-injury Tegner and Lysholm score to 40 patients who received HT autografts. Subjective and functional PRO scores including Lysholm score, Tegner activity level and visual analogue scale for pain were obtained at 6, 12 and 24 months after index surgery. RESULTS: No significant difference between the QT and the HT group was seen at any follow-up in regard to any of the PRO scores for function or pain. 24 months post-surgery the mean Tegner activity score of the HT group was significantly (p = 0.04) lower compared to the pre-injury status. At final follow-up, 27 patients (67.5%) in the QT group and 32 patients (80.0%) in the HT returned to their pre-injury activity level (n.s.). A total of 37 patients (92.5%) of the QT cohort and 35 patients (87.5%) of the HT cohort reported "good" or "excellent" results according to the Lysholm score (n.s.). "No pain" or "slight pain" during severe exertion was reported by 33 patients (82.5%) with QT autograft and 28 patients (82.4%) with HT autograft (n.s.). CONCLUSION: There is no significant difference between PRO 2 years post-operative using either QT or HT autografts. Both QT and HT grafts show acceptable and comparable PRO scores making the QT a reliable graft alternative to HT for primary ACL reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Authors: Mininder S Kocher; J Richard Steadman; Karen K Briggs; William I Sterett; Richard J Hawkins Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2004 Apr-May Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Sahnghoon Lee; Sang Cheol Seong; Chris Hyunchul Jo; Hyuk Soo Han; Joon Hwan An; Myung Chul Lee Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Arndt P Schulz; Vivien Lange; Justus Gille; Christine Voigt; Susanne Fröhlich; Markus Stuhr; Christian Jürgens Journal: Open Access J Sports Med Date: 2013-11-19
Authors: Markus P Arnold; Jacob G Calcei; Nicole Vogel; Robert A Magnussen; Mark Clatworthy; Tim Spalding; John D Campbell; John A Bergfeld; Seth L Sherman Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2021-01-24 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Harasees Singh; Isaac Glassman; Andrew Sheean; Yuichi Hoshino; Kanto Nagai; Darren de Sa Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2022-10-18 Impact factor: 4.114
Authors: Raphael J Crum; Jeffrey Kay; Bryson P Lesniak; Alan Getgood; Volker Musahl; Darren de Sa Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 4.772