Dataset Information

Athletes With Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Autograft for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Were Slower to Meet Rehabilitation Milestones and Return-to-Sport Criteria Than Athletes With Hamstring Tendon Autograft or Soft Tissue Allograft : Secondary Analysis From the ACL-SPORTS Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Graft choices for athletes undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) include bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and hamstring tendon (HT) autografts and soft tissue allografts. The objective was to assess time to meet clinical milestones by graft type in athletes who completed a return-to-sport (RTS) program after ACLR.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Methods

Seventy-nine athletes enrolled after ACLR (allograft, n = 18; BPTB, n = 24; HT, n = 37). Time from surgery to meet (1) enrollment criteria (12 or more weeks post surgery, 80% or greater isometric quadriceps strength index, minimal effusion, and full knee range of motion), and (2) RTS criteria (90% or greater quadriceps strength index, hop testing limb symmetry, and patient-reported outcomes) was calculated. Quadriceps strength, hop performance, and patient-reported outcomes were measured before and after training, and at 1 year post surgery. Descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and 1-way analyses of variance (α = .05) were used to analyze differences among graft types.

Results

On average, the BPTB group (28.5 ± 7.6 weeks) took longer to meet enrollment milestones than the HT (22.5 ± 7.6 weeks, P = .007) and allograft (18.9 ± 5.8 weeks, P<.001) groups. The BPTB group (44.7 ± 15.8 weeks) took longer from surgery to meet RTS criteria than the HT (32.5 ± 9.9 weeks, P = .001) and allograft (29.3 ± 9.0 weeks, P<.001) groups. After training, the quadriceps strength index was lower in the BPTB group (86.1% ± 11.4%) than it was in the HT (96.1% ± 12.9%, P = .004) and allograft (96.9% ± 5.9%, P = .009) groups.

Conclusion

Athletes with a BPTB autograft may take longer than athletes with an HT autograft or a soft tissue allograft to complete postoperative rehabilitation, recover quadriceps strength, and meet RTS criteria. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2020;50(5):259-266. Epub 27 Nov 2019. doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.9111.

SUBMITTER: Smith AH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7196003 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo assess the clinical outcomes comparing rectangular bone-tendon-bone (BTB) grafts and double-bundle hamstring tendon (HM) grafts used for anatomic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in young female athletes.MethodsFrom January 2014 to November 2017, young female athletes 20 years or younger who underwent primary ACL reconstructions by a single surgeon were identified. Patients with concomitant injuries, not being a regular sports participant, the existence of contralateral ACL reconstruction, and who did not have a minimum of 1-year follow-up were excluded. We searched the rate and time for return-to-play, clinical outcomes including chronological instrumental side-to-side tibial translation difference, and muscle strength. Second ACL injury rates between the 2 groups during follow-up period were evaluated.ResultsTwenty-seven BTB ACL reconstructions and 29 HM ACL reconstructions were performed. The mean follow-up periods were 35.2 months in the BTB group and 33.8 months in the HM group. The BTB group showed better knee stability in mean side-to-side translational difference via arthrometric testing of 0.6 mm in the BTB versus 1.7 mm in the HM group at 5 months (P = .01) and 1.1 mm and 2.0 mm at 12 months, respectively (P = .02). There was no significant side-by-side difference in quadriceps muscle strength ratio, but the hamstring muscle strength was significantly better in the BTB group. The graft reinjury rate in the BTB group and the HM group was 0% (0/27) and 10.3% (3/29) (P = .09), respectively. In contrast, contralateral ACL injuries occurred in 17.3% (4/27) of the BTB group and 3.5% (1/29) of the HM group (P = .12).ConclusionsFor young female athletes aged 20 years or younger, the BTB group had better knee instrumental stability than the HM group without range of motion loss or knee extensor muscle strength deficit. Although there was no statistical significance in terms of second ACL injury, we observed fewer graft rerupture and an increasing rate of contralateral ACL injuries in the BTB group.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study.

Project description:BackgroundBone-patellar tendon-bone (bone-tendon-bone) and four-strand hamstring tendon grafts (hamstring) are the most commonly utilized autografts for primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Existing clinical trials, registry studies, and meta-analyses offer conflicting opinions regarding the most favorable graft choice.Questions/purposesWhich graft type for ACL reconstruction (bone-tendon-bone or hamstring) has a higher risk of (1) graft rupture and/or (2) graft laxity?MethodsWe performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective cohort studies, and high-quality national registry studies to compare the outcomes of primary ACL reconstruction with bone-tendon-bone autograft or hamstring autograft. Studies that compared these graft types were identified through a comprehensive search of electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library). Two independent reviewers utilized the Jadad scale for RCT study quality and the Modified Coleman Methodology Score for prospective comparative and registry study quality. The included studies were analyzed for the primary outcome measure of graft rupture with or without revision ACL surgery. In surviving grafts, secondary outcomes of graft laxity were quantified by KT1000/2000™ testing, a positive pivot shift test, and a positive Lachman test. Meta-analysis was performed with Review Manager. A total of 47,613 ACL reconstructions (39,768 bone-tendon-bone and 7845 hamstring) from 14 RCTs, 10 prospective comparative studies, and one high-quality national registry study were included in this meta-analysis. Mean age was 28 years in both groups. Sixty-three percent of patients in the bone-tendon-bone cohort were men versus 57% of patients in the hamstring cohort. Mean followup was 68 ± 55 months.ResultsTwo hundred twelve of 7560 (2.80%) bone-tendon-bone grafts ruptured compared with 1123 of 39,510 (2.84%) in the hamstring group (odds ratio = 0.83, 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.96; p = 0.01). The number needed to treat analysis found that 235 patients would need to be treated with a bone-tendon-bone graft over a hamstring tendon graft to prevent one graft rupture. Instrumented laxity analysis showed that 22% (318 of 1433) of patients in the bone-tendon-bone group had laxity compared with 18% (869 of 4783) in the hamstring tendon group (odds ratio = 0.86; p = 0.16). Pivot shift analysis showed a positive pivot shift in 19% (291 of 1508) of the bone-tendon-bone group compared with 17% (844 of 5062) in the hamstring group (odds ratio = 0.89; p = 0.51). Lachman testing showed a positive Lachman in 25% (71 of 280) of patients receiving bone-tendon-bone grafts compared with 25% (73 of 288) in the hamstring group (odds ratio = 0.96; p = 0.84).ConclusionsIn this meta-analysis of short- to mid-term followup after primary ACL reconstruction, hamstring autografts failed at a higher rate than bone-tendon-bone autografts. However, failure rates were low in each group, the difference observed was small, and we observed few differences between graft types in terms of laxity. Both graft types remain viable options for primary ACL reconstruction, and the difference in failure rate should be one part of a larger conversation with each individual patient about graft selection that should also include potential differences in donor site morbidity, complication rates, and patient-reported outcome measures. Continued prospective collection of patient data will be important going forward as we attempt to further characterize the potential differences in outcomes attributable to graft selection.Level of evidenceLevel III, therapeutic study.