Soft tissue allograft for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Authors

  • Rahul P. Department of Orthopaedics, M. S. Ramaiah Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
  • Suraj H. P. Department of Orthopaedics, M. S. Ramaiah Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
  • Satish Shervegar Department of Orthopaedics, M. S. Ramaiah Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
  • Abhilash Palla Department of Orthopaedics, M. S. Ramaiah Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20172058

Keywords:

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, Allografts, Lysholm score, Tegner score, IKDC score

Abstract

Background: Arthroscopic ACL reconstruction has become one of the most commonly performed arthroscopic surgeries. Inspite of extensive research on available autograft options, controversy still persists regarding the ideal graft. Allograft tendons usage in orthopedic operations has increased because of its advantages. This study was conducted to assess the functional outcome in patients undergoing ACL reconstruction with soft tissue allografts.

Methods: 15 patients with Anterior Cruciate Ligament injury presenting from 2012-2014 who underwent Arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with soft tissue allograft were the subjects of this Prospective study. Assessment of the involved knee was performed to obtain subjective measures of the clinical outcomes of the ACL reconstruction. All patients were followed up at regular intervals of 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months and 2 years.

Results: At the final follow up, the patients had an average Lysholm knee score of 85.60, Tegner score of 7.24 and IKDC score of 85.28. Knee flexion of >1200 was achieved in >80% of patients and minimal laxity in 60% patients but no functional disability in any of them. No graft failures were noted.

Conclusions: Contrary to the fear of graft failure and complications associated with allograft construct for primary ACL reconstruction, allografts yield the same clinical outcome as autografts with the advantages of reduced operative time, no donor site morbidity, preservation of native hamstring tendons, faster and comfortable rehabilitation. Allografts are a good alternative to autografts for primary ACL reconstruction.

Author Biographies

Rahul P., Department of Orthopaedics, M. S. Ramaiah Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Assistant Professor in the Department of Orthopaedics

Suraj H. P., Department of Orthopaedics, M. S. Ramaiah Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Ex-Resident of the Department of Orthopaedics

Satish Shervegar, Department of Orthopaedics, M. S. Ramaiah Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Senior Professor & Head of the department of Orthopaedics

Abhilash Palla, Department of Orthopaedics, M. S. Ramaiah Hospitals, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Junior Resident in the Department of Orthopaedics

References

Hospodar SJ, Miller MD. Controversies in ACL reconstruction: bone- patellar tendon- bone anterior crutiate ligament reconstruction remains the gold standard. Sports Med Arthrosc. 2009;17:242.

Rue JP, Lewis PB, Parameswaran AD, Bach BR Jr. Single-bundle anterior cruci¬ate ligament reconstruction: technique overview and comprehensive review of results. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(Suppl 4):67–74.

Edgar CM, Zimmer S, Kakar S. Prospective comparison of auto and allograft hamstring tendon constructs for ACL reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:2238–46.

Biedert RM, Zwick EB. Ligament- muscle reflex arc after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: electromyographic evaluation. Arch Orthop trauma Surg. 1998;118:81-4.

Gulotta LV, Rodeo SA. Biology of autograft and allograft healing in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Clin Sports Med. 2007;26:509-24.

Cohen SB, Sekiya JK. Allograft safety in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Clin Sports Med. 2007;26:597-605.

Baer GS, Harner CD. Clinical outcomes of allograft versus autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Clin Sports Med. 2007;26:661–81.

Cohen SB, Sekiya JK. Allograft safety in anterior cruciate ligament recon¬struction. Clin Sports Med. 2007;26:597–605.

Gulotta LV, Rodeo SA. Biology of autograft and allograft healing in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Clin Sports Med. 2007;26:509–24.

Engelman GH, Carry PM, Hitt KG, Polousky JD, Vidal AF. Comparison of allograft versus autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction graft survival in an active adolescent cohort. The American journal of sports medicine. 2014;42(10):2311-8.

Edgar CM, Zimmer S, Kakar S, Jones H, Schepsis AA. Prospective comparison of auto and allograft hamstring tendon constructs for ACL reconstruction. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 2008;466(9):2238-46.

Prodromos CC, Joyce B, Shi K. A meta-analysis of stability of autografts compared to allografts after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2007;15:851–6.

Sun K, Zhang J, Wang Y, Xia C, Zhang C, Yu T, Tian S. Arthroscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with hamstring tendon autograft and fresh-frozen allograft: a prospective, randomized controlled study. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39(7):1430-8.

Nikolaou PK, Seaber AV, Glisson RR, Ribbeck BM, Bassett III FH. Anterior cruciate ligament allograft transplantation: long-term function, histology, revascularization, and operative technique. Am J Sports Med. 1986;14(5):348-60.

Goertzen M, Dellmann A, Gruber J, Clahsen H, Bürrig KF. Anterior cruciate ligament allograft transplantation for intraarticular ligamen- tous reconstruction. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1992;111:273- 9.

Jackson DW, Grood ES, Arnoczky SP, Butler DL, Simon TM. Freeze dried anterior cruciate ligament allografts: Preliminary studies in a goat model. Am J Sports Med. 1987;15:295-303.

Fromm B, Schafer B, Parsch D, Kummer W. Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with a cryopreserved ACL allograft: A microangiographic and immunohistochemical study in rabbits. Int Orthop. 1996;20:378-82.

Crawford DC, Hallvik SE, Petering RC, Quilici SM, Black LO, Lavigne SA. Post-operative complications following primary ACL reconstruction using allogenic and autogenic soft tissue grafts: Increased relative morbidity risk is associated with increased graft diameter. Knee. 2013;20:520–5.

Labi N. Deadly transplants. Time. 2002;160(9):50-1.

Wang F, Kang HJ, Chen BC, Zhang YZ, Su YL. Primary ACL reconstruction: comparison of Achilles tendon allograft with tibial anatomical fixation and patellar tendon allograft with external aperture fixation. European J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2011;21(5):333-9.

Kang HJ, Wang XJ, Wu CJ, Cao JH, Yu DH, Zhen ZM. Single-bundle modified patellar tendon versus double-bundle tibialis anterior allograft ACL reconstruction: a prospective randomized study. Knee Surg, Sports Traumatol, Arthroscopy. 2015;23(8):2244-9.

Snow M, Campbell G, Adlington J, Stanish WD. Two to five year results of primary ACL reconstruction using doubled tibialis anterior allograft. Knee Surg, Sports Traumatol, Arthroscopy. 2010;18(10):1374-8.

Hussein M, van Eck CF, Cretnik A, Dinevski D, Fu FH. Prospective randomized clinical evaluation of conventional single-bundle, anatomic single-bundle, and anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: 281 cases with 3-to 5-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(3):512-20.

Jia YH, Sun PF. Comparison of clinical outcome of autograft and allograft reconstruction for anterior cruciate ligament tears. Chinese Med J. 2015;128(23):3163.

Witvrouw E, Bellemans J, Verdonk R, Cambier D, Coorevits P, Almqvist F. Patellar tendon vs. doubled semitendinosus and gracilis tendon for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Int Orthop. 2001;25(5):308-11.

Downloads

Published

2017-06-23

Issue

Section

Original Research Articles