6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Young Females: Patellar versus Hamstring Tendon Autografts

      abstract

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives:

          Female athletes are two to eight times more likely to suffer a primary ACL tear than males. Although ACL reconstruction can successfully return many athletes to their pre-injury sports, re-injury to the ipsilateral or contralateral knee can occur in over 20% of young athletes. Both female sex and younger age have been shown to be risk factors for graft failure. The optimal graft choice for this high-risk population of young female athletes remains unknown and poorly studied. We compared the clinical outcomes in young female patients who underwent ACL reconstruction at our institution using bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) and quadrupled hamstring (HS) autografts.

          Methods:

          Female patients aged 15-25 who underwent primary ACL reconstruction at our institution between January 2012 and May 2015 using either BTB or HS autograft were included in our review. Patients were further sub-divided into 2 age groups, 15-20 and 20-25. Patients with a prior history of ACL injury to either knee, or those with multiligament injury were excluded. Graft choice and fixation method were documented from a review of operative records. Medical records were reviewed to document the occurrence of chondral, meniscal or ligamentous injury to the ipsilateral or contralateral knee in the first two years following ACL reconstruction. Comparisons were made using the chi-square test with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.

          Results:

          A total of 256 females were included in our review with 175 in the BTB group and 81 in the HS group. There was no difference between the groups with regards to average age or time to follow-up. The majority of patients in both groups, 80% of the BTB group and 77.8% of the HS group, were between the ages of 15-20. Interference screw fixation was used in all BTB cases and 63.0% of HS cases. In the remainder of HS cases, femoral suspension and tibial screw (27.2%), and femoral cross-pins and tibial screw (9.9%) were used. In our series, 22.2% of hamstring grafts were augmented with allograft due to inadequate size. Overall, graft re-tear occurred in 6.9% of BTB patients and 12.3% of HS patients [p=0.16]. Contralateral ACL tear occurred in 7.4% of BTB patients and 6.2% of HS patients [p=0.72]. Sub-group analysis showed that 75% of BTB and 100% of HS graft re-tears occurred in females aged 15-20. Within this group, there was a significantly lower rate of graft re-tears in the BTB group (6.4%) when compared to the HS group (15.9%) [p=0.04]. Allograft augmentation was used in four of the ten HS grafts that re-tore. The risk of failure with hamstring augmentation with allograft (4/18, 22.2%) was higher than that of hamstring autograft alone (6/63, 9.5%), but this difference was not significant [p=0.18].

          Conclusion:

          The results of our study indicate that BTB autograft led to fewer graft re-tears compared to HS autograft following ACL reconstruction in female patients aged 15-20. However, this difference was not observed in females aged 20-25. Thus, further investigation regarding optimal graft choice is warranted in this age group.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Orthop J Sports Med
          Orthop J Sports Med
          OJS
          spojs
          Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
          SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )
          2325-9671
          27 July 2018
          July 2018
          : 6
          : 7 suppl4 , 2018 AOSSM Annual Meeting Abstracts
          : 2325967118S00061
          Affiliations
          [1 ]Rothman Institute, Philadelphia, PA, USA
          [2 ]Thomas Jefferson University Program, Philadelphia, PA, USA
          [3 ]The Rothman Institute, Egg Harbor Township, NJ, USA
          [4 ]Rothman Institute at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Bryn Mawr, PA, USA
          Article
          10.1177_2325967118S00061
          10.1177/2325967118S00061
          6083752
          cddc44ca-92d0-45ca-b2e7-6721c24015cc
          © The Author(s) 2018

          This open-access article is published and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - No Derivatives License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits the noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction of the article in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this article without the permission of the Author(s). For article reuse guidelines, please visit SAGE’s website at http://www.sagepub.com/journals-permissions.

          History
          Categories
          Article
          Custom metadata
          corrected-proof

          Comments

          Comment on this article