| Literature DB >> 32239328 |
Wolf Christian Prall1,2, T Kusmenkov3, B Schmidt4, J Fürmetz3, F Haasters5,3, J H Naendrup4, W Böcker3, S Shafizadeh6, H O Mayr5,7, T R Pfeiffer4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Patients with recurrent instability after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction often present with enlarged or misplaced tunnels and bone grafting is required prior to the actual revision reconstruction. Autologous bone grafting features limited quantity and donor site morbidity. These problems may be eliminated utilizing cancellous bone allografts, but their efficiency and reliability have not been investigated systematically. The aim of the present study was to compare tunnel filling rates attained by utilizing either allogenic or autologous cancellous bone grafts.Entities:
Keywords: ACL; Allograft; Anterior cruciate ligament; Autograft; Cancellous bone grafting; Two-staged revision
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32239328 PMCID: PMC7429541 DOI: 10.1007/s00402-020-03421-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg ISSN: 0936-8051 Impact factor: 3.067
Fig. 1Flow chart illustrating the numbers of initially identified, excluded and finally enrolled patients. HTO high tibial osteotomy
Patients’ demographics
| Allogenic | Autologous | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Patients ( | 52 | 51 | |
| Age (years) | 31.8 (SD 9.5) | 27.4 (SD 8.4) | 0.01 |
| Gender distribution (m:f) | 33:19 | 33:18 | 0.9 |
| OP (min) | 86.2 (SD 21.4) | 90.9 (SD 24.7) | 0.31 |
| Hospitalization (days) | 2.0 (SD 1.1) | 4.0 (SD 1.2) | 0.0001 |
| Bone grafting—CT (m) | 5.1 (SD 2.7) | 5.3 (SD 4.1) | 0.73 |
There were no significant differences regarding the gender distribution, the duration of the filling procedure and the interval between the filling procedure and the postoperative CT. Across the groups, significant differences were revealed in terms of age and the duration of hospitalisation
Fig. 2:3D CT analyses of the preexisting tunnels (a, d) revealed that the vast majority of femoral tunnels were positioned to high and to shallow in the allogenic (b) and the autologous bone grafting group (c). Malpositioning of the tibial tunnels was less evident in the allogenic (e) and the autologous group (f). No significant differences were detected between the two groups
Fig. 3CT analyses of the preexisting tunnel widths. The maximum tunnel diameters were determined perpendicular to the femoral (a) and the tibial tunnel axis (c). No significant differences concerning the distributions of femoral (b) and tibial tunnel widths (d) were evident between the two groups
Fig. 4The tunnel filling rates were determined as ratio of the pre- and postoperative tunnel volumes (a–c). Comparable mean filling rates of the femoral and the tibial tunnels were achieved by allogenic and autologous cancellous bone grafting. The graphs illustrate the distribution of the femoral (d) and tibial tunnel filling rates (e)