3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Hybrid graft vs autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          Purpose

          We conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of hybrid grafts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

          Methods

          We performed an electronic search of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, and ScienceDirect from the inception of these databases to February 2018, based on the terms “anterior cruciate ligament or ACL reconstruction”, “autograft”, “hybrid”, and “augment”. Relevant journals and conference proceedings were searched manually. Quality assessment, data extraction, and calculation of data from the included studies were conducted independently by two reviewers using RevMan 5.1.

          Results

          One randomized controlled trial and eight nonrandomized controlled trials met inclusion criteria. Larger graft diameters were found in the hybrid-graft group (mean difference −1.47, P=0.0001). There was no significant difference in failure rate (OR 2.13, P=0.21), retearing (OR 2.23, P=0.12), revision of ACLR (OR 1.05, P=0.87) or reoperation (OR 1.27, P=0.35). Subgroup analysis showed that hybrid-graft patients with meniscus injury suffered more revision (OR 4.10, P=0.02) and reoperation (OR 5.74, P=0.001). Both autografts and hybrid grafts performed similarly in most knee-score systems. However, autograft patients had better KT-1000 (mean difference 0.24, P=0.05) and quality-of-life results on the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score measure (mean difference 7.23, P=0.05).

          Conclusion

          This meta-analysis of the current literature indicates similar performance of hybrid or autologous grafts in ACLR, though hybrid grafts had larger diameters than autografts. Other potential factors to influence failure, revision, or postoperative knee function, such as irradiation, age at reconstruction, meniscus injury/treatment, and hybrid-graft remodeling, should be investigated further.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Incidence and trends of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the United States.

          Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is among the most commonly studied injuries in orthopaedics. The previously reported incidence of ACL injury in the United States has varied considerably and is often based on expert opinion or single insurance databases.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Allograft Versus Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

            Background: Tearing an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft is a devastating occurrence after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Identifying and understanding the independent predictors of ACLR graft failure is important for surgical planning, patient counseling, and efforts to decrease the risk of graft failure. Hypothesis: Patient and surgical variables will predict graft failure after ACLR. Study Design: Prospective cohort study. Methods: A multicenter group initiated a cohort study in 2002 to identify predictors of ACLR outcomes, including graft failure. First, to control for confounders, a single surgeon’s data (n = 281 ACLRs) were used to develop a multivariable regression model for ACLR graft failure. Evaluated variables were graft type (autograft vs allograft), sex, age, body mass index, activity at index injury, presence of a meniscus tear, and primary versus revision reconstruction. Second, the model was validated with the rest of the multicenter study’s data (n = 645 ACLRs) to evaluate the generalizability of the model. Results: Patient age and ACL graft type were significant predictors of graft failure for all study surgeons. Patients in the age group of 10 to 19 years had the highest percentage of graft failures. The odds of graft rupture with an allograft reconstruction are 4 times higher than those of autograft reconstructions. For each 10-year decrease in age, the odds of graft rupture increase 2.3 times. Conclusion: There is an increased risk of ACL graft rupture in patients who have undergone allograft reconstruction. Younger patients also have an increased risk of ACL graft failure. Clinical Relevance: Given these risks for ACL graft rupture, allograft ACLRs should be performed with caution in the younger patient population.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The influence of hamstring autograft size on patient-reported outcomes and risk of revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Cohort Study.

              The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of graft size on patient-reported outcomes and revision risk after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. A retrospective chart review of prospectively collected cohort data was performed, and 263 of 320 consecutive patients (82.2%) undergoing primary ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft were evaluated. We recorded graft size; femoral tunnel drilling technique; patient age, sex, and body mass index at the time of ACL reconstruction; Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and International Knee Documentation Committee score preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively; and whether each patient underwent revision ACL reconstruction during the 2-year follow-up period. Revision was used as a marker for graft failure. The relation between graft size and patient-reported outcomes was determined by multiple linear regression. The relation between graft size and risk of revision was determined by dichotomizing graft size at 8 mm and stratifying by age. After we controlled for age, sex, operative side, surgeon, body mass index, graft choice, and femoral tunnel drilling technique, a 1-mm increase in graft size was noted to correlate with a 3.3-point increase in the KOOS pain subscale (P = .003), a 2.0-point increase in the KOOS activities of daily living subscale (P = .034), a 5.2-point increase in the KOOS sport/recreation function subscale (P = .004), and a 3.4-point increase in the subjective International Knee Documentation Committee score (P = .026). Revision was required in 0 of 64 patients (0.0%) with grafts greater than 8 mm in diameter and 14 of 199 patients (7.0%) with grafts 8 mm in diameter or smaller (P = .037). Among patients aged 18 years or younger, revision was required in 0 of 14 patients (0.0%) with grafts greater than 8 mm in diameter and 13 of 71 patients (18.3%) with grafts 8 mm in diameter or smaller. Smaller hamstring autograft size is a predictor of poorer KOOS sport/recreation function 2 years after primary ACL reconstruction. A larger sample size is required to confirm the relation between graft size and risk of revision ACL reconstruction. Level III, retrospective comparative study. Copyright © 2013 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
                Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
                Dove Medical Press
                1176-6336
                1178-203X
                2019
                14 March 2019
                : 15
                : 487-495
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Joint Surgery, Tianjin Hospital, Tianjin, People’s Republic of China, tjyydrliu@ 123456126.com
                [2 ]Department of Sport Medicine, Tianjin Hospital, Tianjin, People’s Republic of China
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Jun Liu, Department of Joint Surgery, Tianjin Hospital, 406 Jiefang Nan Road, Tianjin 300211, People’s Republic of China, Tel +86 133 0210 9035, Email tjyydrliu@ 123456126.com
                Article
                tcrm-15-487
                10.2147/TCRM.S187979
                6422411
                © 2019 Wang et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited

                The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                Categories
                Original Research

                Medicine

                reconstruction, anterior cruciate ligament, autograft, hybrid graft

                Comments

                Comment on this article