Michèle N J Keizer1, Roy A G Hoogeslag2, Jos J A M van Raay3, Egbert Otten1, Reinoud W Brouwer4. 1. Center for Human Movement Science, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 2. Centre for Orthopaedic Surgery OCON, Hengelo, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Martini Hospital Groningen, Van Swietenplein 1, 9728 NT, Groningen, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Martini Hospital Groningen, Van Swietenplein 1, 9728 NT, Groningen, The Netherlands. R.W.Brouwer@mzh.nl.
Abstract
PURPOSE: After revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), the rate of return to the pre-injury type of sport (RTS type) is low and graft choice might be an important factor. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in outcome after revision ACLR using a patellar tendon allograft compared to an ipsilateral patellar tendon autograft. It was hypothesized that the rate of RTS type using an ipsilateral patellar tendon autograft will be superior to using patellar tendon allograft. METHODS: The design is a retrospective cohort study. Inclusion criteria were patients who underwent revision ACLR with a minimum follow-up of 1 year after revision using a patellar allograft or ipsilateral autograft. Primary study parameter was rate of RTS type. Secondary study parameters were RTS level, subscores of the KOOS, the IKDCsubjective, the Tegner score and reasons for no RTS. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients participated in this study (36 allografts and 46 autografts). In patients with a minimum follow-up of 1 year, rate of RTS type was 51.4% for the patellar tendon allograft and 62.8% for the patellar tendon autograft group (n.s.). In patients with a minimum follow-up rate of 2 years, rate of RTS type was 43.3 versus 75.0%, respectively (p = 0.027). No differences in secondary study parameters were found. In patients with a minimum follow-up of 1 year, rate of RTS type was significantly higher (p = 0.025) for patients without anxiety compared to patients who were anxious to perform certain movements. CONCLUSION: After a minimum follow-up of 2 years, rate of RTS type is in favour of using an ipsilateral patellar tendon autograft when compared to using a patellar tendon allograft in patients undergoing revision ACLR; after a minimum follow-up of 1 year, no significant difference was found. In revision ACLR, the results of this study might influence graft choice in favour of autologous graft when the use of an allograft or autograft patellar tendon is considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
PURPOSE: After revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), the rate of return to the pre-injury type of sport (RTS type) is low and graft choice might be an important factor. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in outcome after revision ACLR using a patellar tendon allograft compared to an ipsilateral patellar tendon autograft. It was hypothesized that the rate of RTS type using an ipsilateral patellar tendon autograft will be superior to using patellar tendon allograft. METHODS: The design is a retrospective cohort study. Inclusion criteria were patients who underwent revision ACLR with a minimum follow-up of 1 year after revision using a patellar allograft or ipsilateral autograft. Primary study parameter was rate of RTS type. Secondary study parameters were RTS level, subscores of the KOOS, the IKDCsubjective, the Tegner score and reasons for no RTS. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients participated in this study (36 allografts and 46 autografts). In patients with a minimum follow-up of 1 year, rate of RTS type was 51.4% for the patellar tendon allograft and 62.8% for the patellar tendon autograft group (n.s.). In patients with a minimum follow-up rate of 2 years, rate of RTS type was 43.3 versus 75.0%, respectively (p = 0.027). No differences in secondary study parameters were found. In patients with a minimum follow-up of 1 year, rate of RTS type was significantly higher (p = 0.025) for patients without anxiety compared to patients who were anxious to perform certain movements. CONCLUSION: After a minimum follow-up of 2 years, rate of RTS type is in favour of using an ipsilateral patellar tendon autograft when compared to using a patellar tendon allograft in patients undergoing revision ACLR; after a minimum follow-up of 1 year, no significant difference was found. In revision ACLR, the results of this study might influence graft choice in favour of autologous graft when the use of an allograft or autograft patellar tendon is considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Authors: Keith R Reinhardt; Sommer Hammoud; Andrea L Bowers; Ben-Paul Umunna; Frank A Cordasco Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Joseph M Hart; Kimberly A Turman; David R Diduch; Jennifer A Hart; Mark D Miller Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2010-11-26 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Marion A Kainer; Jeanne V Linden; David N Whaley; Harvey T Holmes; William R Jarvis; Daniel B Jernigan; Lennox K Archibald Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-06-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lisa M Tibor; Joy L Long; Peter L Schilling; Ryan J Lilly; James E Carpenter; Bruce S Miller Journal: Sports Health Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 3.843
Authors: Nicole A Schwery; Michael T Kiely; Christopher M Larson; Corey A Wulf; Christie S Heikes; Ryan W Hess; M Russell Giveans; Braidy S Solie; Chrisopher P Doney Journal: Int J Sports Phys Ther Date: 2022-04-01