Can graft choice affect return to sport following revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery?

Legnani, Claudio; Zini, Stefania; Borgo, Enrico; Ventura, Alberto

doi:10.1007/s00402-015-2387-3

Cited by 38 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The definition of return to sport used in each study is presented in table 2. Only three studies reported the average length of time after surgery at which patients returned to sport 19 21 26. One study found no significant difference in the mean (SD) length of time at which high school athletes (6.4 (2.8)), college athletes (7.1 (2.6) months) and recreational athletes (6.6 (2.8) months) returned to competitive sport, all of whom received a BPTB autograft 19.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In only one of the included studies, the primary purpose was to compare return to sport outcomes regarding the use of different graft types retrospectively 26. Two other surgical centres reported return to sport outcomes from the use of different graft types in studies using a cohort study design 22 29.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two other surgical centres reported return to sport outcomes from the use of different graft types in studies using a cohort study design 22 29. One study, in a retrospective comparative analysis, reported no significant difference in the return to any or preinjury level of sport rate between those revised with HS autografts (return to any sport, 78%; return to preinjury level of sport, 70%) in comparison to those revised with allografts (return to any sport, 76%; return to preinjury level of sports, 67%) 26. Anand et al 22 found that, in their cohort of patients participating in high impact sports, those undergoing revision with BPTB autografts returned to their preinjury activity level at a rate (49%) higher than that of patients who had undergone revision reconstruction with an HS autograft (41%); however, this difference was not statistically significant.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Graft choice has no significant influence on the rate of return to sport at the preinjury level after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Kay

Naji

et al. 2017

Journal of ISAKOS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Graft choice has no significant influence on the rate of return to sport at the preinjury level after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Kay

Naji

et al. 2017

Journal of ISAKOS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Autografts constitute a popular choice, 20,21 although postoperative anterior knee pain following bonepatellar tendon-bone harvesting may result in substantial impairment for patients. 22 To minimize, reduce donor-site morbidity, operative time, and incisions, allografts have been gaining in popularity 23,24 ; however, they carry the risks of immune response, disease transmission risk, delayed graft incorporation, reduced availability, and costs which may discourage their use. 25 For these reasons, we chose autologous hamstrings to perform ACL reconstruction in combination with UKR.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unicompartmental Knee Replacement Combined to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Midterm Results

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A study was conducted to retrospectively evaluate the outcomes of combined medial unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. The hypothesis was that this procedure would lead to satisfying results in patients affected by medial osteoarthritis and ACL insufficiency. Fourteen patients with ACL deficiency and concomitant medial compartment symptomatic osteoarthritis were treated from 2006 to 2010. Twelve of them were followed-up for an average time of 7.8 year (range: 6–10 years). Assessment included Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome score (KOOS), Oxford Knee score (OKS), American Knee Society scores (AKSS), Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) index of osteoarthritis, Tegner's activity level, objective examination including instrumented laxity test with KT-1000 arthrometer, and standard X-rays. KOOS score, OKS, WOMAC index, and the AKSS improved significantly at follow-up (p < 0.001). There was no clinical evidence of instability in any of the knees as evaluated with clinical and instrumented laxity testing (p < 0.001). No pathologic radiolucent lines were observed around the components. In one patient, a total knee prosthesis was implanted due to the progression of signs of osteoarthritis in the lateral compartment 3 years after primary surgery. UKR combined with ACL reconstruction is an effective therapeutic option for the treatment of combined medial unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis and ACL deficiency and confirms subjective and objective clinical improvement up to 8 years after surgery. This study reflects level IV evidence.

show abstract

“…A smaller cohort study of 44 patients demonstrated no major differences between allograft and autograft but showed quicker return to sports for autograft. 6 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Allograft Use Results in Higher Re-revision Rate for Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Nissen

Eysturoy

Nielsen

et al. 2018

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:The literature on revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) outcomes is generally sparse, but previous studies have demonstrated that autograft use results in improved sports function and patient-reported outcome measures compared with allograft. However, knowledge is still lacking regarding the impact of graft type on rates of re-revision.Purpose:To investigate the clinical outcomes and failure rates of revision ACLRs performed with either allograft or autograft.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.Methods:A search of the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Registry identified 1619 revision ACLRs: 1315 were autograft procedures and 221 were allograft procedures (type of graft was not identified for 83 procedures). Clinical outcomes after 1 year were reported via the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Tegner activity score, and an objective knee stability measurement that determined side-to-side differences in instrumented sagittal knee laxity. Failure was determined as re-revision. Outcomes for revision were provided for the full life of the registry, up to 10 years.Results:The re-revision rate was significantly higher for allograft compared with autograft (12.7% vs 5.4%; P < .001), leading to a hazard ratio for re-revision of 2.2 (95% CI, 1.4-3.4) for allografts compared with autografts when corrected for age. At 1-year follow-up, objective knee stability was significantly different (2.1 ± 2.1 mm for allograft vs 1.7 ± 1.8 mm for autograft; P = .01), and the KOOS subscale scores for symptoms, pain, activities of daily living, sports, and quality of life were 67, 76, 84, 49, and 46 for allograft and 67, 78, 84, 51, and 48 for autograft, respectively, with no difference between groups.Conclusion:In this observational population-based study, the ALCR re-revision rate was 2.2 times greater for allograft compared with autograft procedures. Allograft was associated with greater knee laxity at 1-year follow-up. However, subjective clinical outcomes and knee function were not inferior for allograft patients. These results indicate that autograft is a better graft choice for revision ALCR.

show abstract

Can graft choice affect return to sport following revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery?

Cited by 38 publications

References 13 publications

Graft choice has no significant influence on the rate of return to sport at the preinjury level after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Graft choice has no significant influence on the rate of return to sport at the preinjury level after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Unicompartmental Knee Replacement Combined to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Midterm Results

Allograft Use Results in Higher Re-revision Rate for Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About