Thibaut Lucena1, Marie Cavaignac2, Vincent Marot1, Louis Courtot1, Christian Lutz3, Emilie Bérard4, Etienne Cavaignac5,6. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Trauma, Pierre Paul Riquet University Hospital, Toulouse, France. 2. Clinique Rive Gauche, Toulouse, France. 3. Institut de Chirurgie Orthopédique Et Sportive À Strasbourg (ICOSS), Strasbourg, France. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Health Economics and Public Health, INSERM-University of Toulouse III, Toulouse University Hospital, UMR1027, Toulouse, France. 5. Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Trauma, Pierre Paul Riquet University Hospital, Toulouse, France. cavaignac.etienne@gmail.com. 6. I2R - Institut de Recherche Riquet, Toulouse, France. cavaignac.etienne@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Despite encouraging clinical, biomechanical and histological results, ACL reconstruction using the ITB was slowly abandoned. The hypothesis was that the current literature supports the use of ITB as the graft of choice for ACL reconstruction because of its good outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed in the PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Ovid databases to identify published clinical studies relevant to ACL reconstruction with ITB autograft and studies comparing ITB autograft with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and hamstring (HT) autografts (none were found). The results of the eligible studies were analyzed in terms of graft failure, instrumented knee laxity measurements, Lachman test, pivot-shift test, Lysholm score, objective and subjective International Knee Documentation committee (IKDC) scores, Tegner activity score, return to sports rate, return to sports at pre-injury level and complications. RESULTS: Nineteen clinical studies including 1,210 patients with ACL reconstruction met the inclusion criteria. Graft failure occurred after ITB autograft in 4.2% of patients. Postoperative mean side-to-side laxity was 1.41 mm with 21% of patients having greater than 3 mm side-to-side difference. Lachman test and pivot-shift test were negative (grade 0) in 57% and 85%, respectively, and were grade 0 or 1 in 95% and 97%, respectively. Functional outcomes were satisfactory in 84% of patients with good to excellent results (Lysholm score > 84). Mean postoperative Lysholm score was 93.3 and 84% of patients had an objective IKDC grade of A or B. Mean postoperative Tegner score was 6.8. The return to sports rate was 89% and 61% of patients returned to their pre-injury level. A comparison of 89 ITB versus 80 BPTB autografts revealed no significant differences in graft failure (n.s.), instrumented mean side-to-side knee laxity difference (n.s.) or Tegner score (n.s.). CONCLUSION: The graft survival rate and clinical and functional outcomes for ITB autograft are satisfactory. By allowing ACL reconstruction and lateral tenodesis to be done with a single, continuous, pedicled graft through an outside-in femoral tunnel, this technique may become the preferred alternative for primary or secondary ACL surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.
PURPOSE: Despite encouraging clinical, biomechanical and histological results, ACL reconstruction using the ITB was slowly abandoned. The hypothesis was that the current literature supports the use of ITB as the graft of choice for ACL reconstruction because of its good outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed in the PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Ovid databases to identify published clinical studies relevant to ACL reconstruction with ITB autograft and studies comparing ITB autograft with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and hamstring (HT) autografts (none were found). The results of the eligible studies were analyzed in terms of graft failure, instrumented knee laxity measurements, Lachman test, pivot-shift test, Lysholm score, objective and subjective International Knee Documentation committee (IKDC) scores, Tegner activity score, return to sports rate, return to sports at pre-injury level and complications. RESULTS: Nineteen clinical studies including 1,210 patients with ACL reconstruction met the inclusion criteria. Graft failure occurred after ITB autograft in 4.2% of patients. Postoperative mean side-to-side laxity was 1.41 mm with 21% of patients having greater than 3 mm side-to-side difference. Lachman test and pivot-shift test were negative (grade 0) in 57% and 85%, respectively, and were grade 0 or 1 in 95% and 97%, respectively. Functional outcomes were satisfactory in 84% of patients with good to excellent results (Lysholm score > 84). Mean postoperative Lysholm score was 93.3 and 84% of patients had an objective IKDC grade of A or B. Mean postoperative Tegner score was 6.8. The return to sports rate was 89% and 61% of patients returned to their pre-injury level. A comparison of 89 ITB versus 80 BPTB autografts revealed no significant differences in graft failure (n.s.), instrumented mean side-to-side knee laxity difference (n.s.) or Tegner score (n.s.). CONCLUSION: The graft survival rate and clinical and functional outcomes for ITB autograft are satisfactory. By allowing ACL reconstruction and lateral tenodesis to be done with a single, continuous, pedicled graft through an outside-in femoral tunnel, this technique may become the preferred alternative for primary or secondary ACL surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.
Authors: Daniel B Chan; H Thomas Temple; Loren L Latta; Siddharth Mahure; Jeremy Dennis; Lee D Kaplan Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2010-09-27 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Felipe Galvão Abreu; Charles Pioger; Florent Franck; Benjamin Freychet; Thais D Vieira; Bertrand Sonnery-Cottet Journal: Arthrosc Tech Date: 2020-05-04