Prospective comparison of auto and allograft hamstring tendon constructs for ACL reconstruction

被引:89
作者
Edgar, Cory M. [1 ]
Zimmer, Scott [1 ]
Kakar, Sanjeev [1 ]
Jones, Hugh [1 ]
Schepsis, Anthony A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Boston Univ, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Med Ctr, Boston, MA 02118 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1007/s11999-008-0305-5
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Although allograft use for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction has continued to increase during the last 10 years, concerns remain regarding the long-term function of allografts (primarily that they may stretch with time) and clinical efficacy compared with autograft tendons. We attempted to address these issues by prospectively comparing identical quadrupled hamstring autografts with allograft constructs for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in patients with a minimum followup of 3 years. Eighty-four patients (37 with autografts and 47 with allografts) were enrolled; the mean followup was 52 +/- 11 months for the autograft group and 48 +/- 8 months for the allograft group. Outcome measurements included objective and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee scores, Lysholm scores, Tegner activity scales, and KT-1000 arthrometer measurements. The two cohorts were similar in average age, acute or chronic nature of the anterior cruciate ligament rupture, and incidence of concomitant meniscal surgeries. At final followup, we found no difference in terms of Tegner, Lysholm, KT-1000, or International Knee Documentation Committee scores. Five anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions failed: three in the autograft group and two in the allograft group. Our data suggest laxity is not increased in allograft tendons compared with autografts and clinical outcome scores 3 to 6 years after surgery are similar. Level of Evidence: Level II, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
引用
收藏
页码:2238 / 2246
页数:9
相关论文
共 51 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2002, MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, V51, P207
[2]   Four-strand hamstring tendon autograft compared with patellar tendon-bone autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction - A randomized study with two-year follow-up [J].
Aune, AK ;
Holm, I ;
Risberg, MA ;
Jensen, HK ;
Steen, H .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2001, 29 (06) :722-728
[3]  
Bach Bernard R Jr, 2004, J Knee Surg, V17, P125
[4]   Should allografts be used for routine anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions? [J].
Barber, FA ;
McGuire, DA ;
Johnson, DH .
ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2003, 19 (04) :421-425
[5]   The safe and effective use of allograft tissue - An update [J].
Barbour, SA ;
King, W .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2003, 31 (05) :791-797
[6]   Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament in females: A comparison of hamstring versus patellar tendon autograft [J].
Barrett, GR ;
Noojin, FK ;
Hartzog, CW ;
Nash, CR .
ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2002, 18 (01) :46-54
[7]   Hamstrings vs. patella tendon for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomised controlled trial [J].
Beard, DJ ;
Anderson, JL ;
Davies, S ;
Price, AJ ;
Dodd, CAF .
KNEE, 2001, 8 (01) :45-50
[8]   Interference screw fixation strength of a quadrupled hamstring tendon graft is directly related to bone mineral density and insertion torque [J].
Brand, JC ;
Pienkowski, D ;
Steenlage, E ;
Hamilton, D ;
Johnson, DL ;
Caborn, DNM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE, 2000, 28 (05) :705-710
[9]  
BROWN CH, 1993, CLIN SPORT MED, V12, P723
[10]   The effects of semitendinosus and gracilis harvest in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction [J].
Burks, RT ;
Crim, J ;
Fink, BP ;
Boylan, DN ;
Greis, PE .
ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2005, 21 (10) :1177-1185