Hamstring autograft maturation is superior to tibialis allograft following anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Sang Gyun Kim, Soo Hyun Kim, Jae Gyoon Kim, Ki-Mo Jang, Hong Chul Lim, Ji Hoon Bae

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: Using second-look arthroscopy, graft maturation was investigated and compared between hamstring (HA) autografts and tibialis anterior (TA) allografts after anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Methods: Fifty-six patients who underwent second-look arthroscopy after anatomic single-bundle ACLR with either HA autografts (26, HA group) or TA allografts (30, TA group) from 2007 to 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Graft maturation on second-look arthroscopy was evaluated in terms of four parameters: graft integrity (tear), synovial coverage, graft tension, and graft vascularization. Each parameter received a maximum of two points, depending on the status of the reconstructed graft. The total graft maturation score was calculated as the sum of the parameter scores. The total graft maturation and individual parameter scores were compared between the two groups. Results: The mean time from ACLR to second-look arthroscopy was 22.5 ± 7.8 months. The maturation scores in the HA group were significantly better in terms of graft integrity (p = 0.041), graft tension (p = 0.010), and graft vascularization (p = 0.024), whereas the graft synovial coverage score was not significantly different. The total graft maturation score of the HA group was significantly higher than that of the TA group (6.3 ± 0.4 vs. 4.9 ± 0.3, p = 0.013). Conclusions: This study shows the superior graft maturation of HA autografts compared with that of TA allografts at a mean follow-up of 22.5 ± 7.8 months after anatomic single-bundle ACLR. When anatomic ACLR using soft tissue graft is planned, HA autograft is recommended rather than soft tissue allograft, especially in young and active patients. Level of evidence: Retrospective cohort review, Level III.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-7
Number of pages7
JournalKnee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2017 Jul 26

Fingerprint

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
Autografts
Allografts
Transplants
Arthroscopy
Tears

Keywords

  • Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
  • Arthroscopy
  • Hamstring
  • Second-look surgery
  • Tibialis anterior

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

@article{a8b225cfb7ef4617a27b425811a1b9d1,
title = "Hamstring autograft maturation is superior to tibialis allograft following anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction",
abstract = "Purpose: Using second-look arthroscopy, graft maturation was investigated and compared between hamstring (HA) autografts and tibialis anterior (TA) allografts after anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Methods: Fifty-six patients who underwent second-look arthroscopy after anatomic single-bundle ACLR with either HA autografts (26, HA group) or TA allografts (30, TA group) from 2007 to 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Graft maturation on second-look arthroscopy was evaluated in terms of four parameters: graft integrity (tear), synovial coverage, graft tension, and graft vascularization. Each parameter received a maximum of two points, depending on the status of the reconstructed graft. The total graft maturation score was calculated as the sum of the parameter scores. The total graft maturation and individual parameter scores were compared between the two groups. Results: The mean time from ACLR to second-look arthroscopy was 22.5 ± 7.8 months. The maturation scores in the HA group were significantly better in terms of graft integrity (p = 0.041), graft tension (p = 0.010), and graft vascularization (p = 0.024), whereas the graft synovial coverage score was not significantly different. The total graft maturation score of the HA group was significantly higher than that of the TA group (6.3 ± 0.4 vs. 4.9 ± 0.3, p = 0.013). Conclusions: This study shows the superior graft maturation of HA autografts compared with that of TA allografts at a mean follow-up of 22.5 ± 7.8 months after anatomic single-bundle ACLR. When anatomic ACLR using soft tissue graft is planned, HA autograft is recommended rather than soft tissue allograft, especially in young and active patients. Level of evidence: Retrospective cohort review, Level III.",
keywords = "Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, Arthroscopy, Hamstring, Second-look surgery, Tibialis anterior",
author = "Kim, {Sang Gyun} and Kim, {Soo Hyun} and Kim, {Jae Gyoon} and Ki-Mo Jang and Lim, {Hong Chul} and Bae, {Ji Hoon}",
year = "2017",
month = "7",
day = "26",
doi = "10.1007/s00167-017-4649-9",
language = "English",
pages = "1--7",
journal = "Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy",
issn = "0942-2056",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Hamstring autograft maturation is superior to tibialis allograft following anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

AU - Kim, Sang Gyun

AU - Kim, Soo Hyun

AU - Kim, Jae Gyoon

AU - Jang, Ki-Mo

AU - Lim, Hong Chul

AU - Bae, Ji Hoon

PY - 2017/7/26

Y1 - 2017/7/26

N2 - Purpose: Using second-look arthroscopy, graft maturation was investigated and compared between hamstring (HA) autografts and tibialis anterior (TA) allografts after anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Methods: Fifty-six patients who underwent second-look arthroscopy after anatomic single-bundle ACLR with either HA autografts (26, HA group) or TA allografts (30, TA group) from 2007 to 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Graft maturation on second-look arthroscopy was evaluated in terms of four parameters: graft integrity (tear), synovial coverage, graft tension, and graft vascularization. Each parameter received a maximum of two points, depending on the status of the reconstructed graft. The total graft maturation score was calculated as the sum of the parameter scores. The total graft maturation and individual parameter scores were compared between the two groups. Results: The mean time from ACLR to second-look arthroscopy was 22.5 ± 7.8 months. The maturation scores in the HA group were significantly better in terms of graft integrity (p = 0.041), graft tension (p = 0.010), and graft vascularization (p = 0.024), whereas the graft synovial coverage score was not significantly different. The total graft maturation score of the HA group was significantly higher than that of the TA group (6.3 ± 0.4 vs. 4.9 ± 0.3, p = 0.013). Conclusions: This study shows the superior graft maturation of HA autografts compared with that of TA allografts at a mean follow-up of 22.5 ± 7.8 months after anatomic single-bundle ACLR. When anatomic ACLR using soft tissue graft is planned, HA autograft is recommended rather than soft tissue allograft, especially in young and active patients. Level of evidence: Retrospective cohort review, Level III.

AB - Purpose: Using second-look arthroscopy, graft maturation was investigated and compared between hamstring (HA) autografts and tibialis anterior (TA) allografts after anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Methods: Fifty-six patients who underwent second-look arthroscopy after anatomic single-bundle ACLR with either HA autografts (26, HA group) or TA allografts (30, TA group) from 2007 to 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Graft maturation on second-look arthroscopy was evaluated in terms of four parameters: graft integrity (tear), synovial coverage, graft tension, and graft vascularization. Each parameter received a maximum of two points, depending on the status of the reconstructed graft. The total graft maturation score was calculated as the sum of the parameter scores. The total graft maturation and individual parameter scores were compared between the two groups. Results: The mean time from ACLR to second-look arthroscopy was 22.5 ± 7.8 months. The maturation scores in the HA group were significantly better in terms of graft integrity (p = 0.041), graft tension (p = 0.010), and graft vascularization (p = 0.024), whereas the graft synovial coverage score was not significantly different. The total graft maturation score of the HA group was significantly higher than that of the TA group (6.3 ± 0.4 vs. 4.9 ± 0.3, p = 0.013). Conclusions: This study shows the superior graft maturation of HA autografts compared with that of TA allografts at a mean follow-up of 22.5 ± 7.8 months after anatomic single-bundle ACLR. When anatomic ACLR using soft tissue graft is planned, HA autograft is recommended rather than soft tissue allograft, especially in young and active patients. Level of evidence: Retrospective cohort review, Level III.

KW - Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

KW - Arthroscopy

KW - Hamstring

KW - Second-look surgery

KW - Tibialis anterior

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85026896127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85026896127&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00167-017-4649-9

DO - 10.1007/s00167-017-4649-9

M3 - Article

SP - 1

EP - 7

JO - Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

JF - Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

SN - 0942-2056

ER -