The 2 most frequently used autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction are the bone-patellar tendon-bone and the quadrupled hamstrings tendon.
Hypothesis
Hamstring tendon graft is superior to patellar tendon graft in restoring tibial rotation during highly demanding activities because of its superiority in strength and linear stiffness and because it is closer morphologically to the anatomy of the natural anterior cruciate ligament.
Study Design
Case control study; Level of evidence, 3.
Methods
Eleven patients with patellar tendon graft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, 11 patients with hamstring tendon graft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, and 11 controls were assessed. Kinematic data were collected (50 Hz) with a 6-camera optoelectronic system while the subjects descended stairs and, immediately after, pivoted on their landing leg. The dependent variable examined was the tibial internal-external rotation during pivoting. All patients in both groups were also assessed clinically and with the use of a KT-1000 arthrometer to evaluate anterior tibial translation.
Results
The results demonstrated that reconstructions with either graft successfully restored anterior tibial translation. However, both anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction groups had significantly increased tibial rotation when compared with the controls, whereas no differences were found between the 2 reconstructed groups.
Conclusion
The 2 most frequently used autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction cannot restore tibial rotation to normal levels.
Clinical Relevance
New surgical techniques are needed that can better approximate the actual anatomy and function of the anterior cruciate ligament.
AndersonA.F., SnyderR.B., LipscombB.A.Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A prospective randomized study of three surgical methods. Am J Sports Med.2001; 29: 272–279.
2.
AndriacchiT.P., AnderssonG.B.J., FermierR.W., SternD., GalanteJ.O.A study of lower-limb mechanics during stair-climbing. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1980; 62: 749–757.
3.
ArnoczkyS.P.Anatomy of the anterior cruciate ligament. Clin Orthop.1982; 172: 19–25.
4.
AuneA.K., HolmI., RisbergM.A., JensenH.K., SteenH.Four-strand hamstring tendon autograft compared with patellar tendon-bone autograft for ACL reconstruction. A randomized study with two-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med.2001; 29: 722–728.
5.
BeynnonB.D., JohnsonR.J., FlemingB.C.Anterior cruciate ligament replacement: comparison of bone-patellar tendon-bone grafts with two-strand hamstring grafts. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2002; 84: 1503–1513.
6.
BrandJ., WeilerA., CabornD., BrownCHJr., JohnsonD.L.Graft fixation in cruciate ligament reconstruction: current concepts. Am J Sports Med.2000; 28: 761–774.
7.
BrandssonS., KarlssonJ., SwardL., KartusJ., ErikssonBl, KarrholmJ.Kinematics and laxity of the knee joint after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Pre- and postoperative radiostereometric studies. Am J Sports Med;2002; 30: 361–367.
8.
BrownCHJr., SteinerM.E., CarsonE.W.The use of hamstring tendons for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: technique and results. Clin Sports Med.1993; 12: 723–756.
9.
Bush-JosephC.A., HurwitzD.E., PatelR.R.Dynamic function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autologous patellar tendon. Am J Sports Med.2001; 29: 36–41.
10.
CappozzoA., CataniF., LeardiniA., BenedettiM.G., CroceU.D.Position and orientation in space of bones during movement: experimental artifacts. Clin Biomech.1996; 11: 90–100.
11.
ChambersH., SutherlandD.A practical guide to gait analysis. J Am Acad Orthop Surg.2002; 10: 222–231.
12.
ChenL., CooleyV., RosenbergT.ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon. Orthop Clin North Am.2003; 34: 9–18.
13.
CorryI.S., WebbJ.M., ClingelefferA.J., PinczewskiL.A.Arthroscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: a comparison of patellar tendon autograft and four-strand hamstring tendon autograft. Am J Sports Med.1999; 27: 444–454.
14.
DavisR., OunpuuS., TyburskiD.A gait analysis data collection and reduction technique. Hum Mov Sci.1991; 10: 575–587.
15.
EjerhedL., KartusJ., SernertN., KohlerK., KarlssonJ.Patellar tendon or semitendinosus tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A prospective randomized study with a two-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med.2003; 31: 19–25.
16.
FellerJ.A., WebsterK.E.A randomized comparison of patellar tendon and hamstring tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med.2003; 31: 564–573.
17.
FreedmanK.B., D'AmatoM.J., NedeffD.D., KazA., BachBRJr.Arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a metaanalysis comparing patellar tendon and hamstring tendon autografts. Am J Sports Med.2003; 31: 2–11.
18.
FuF.H., BennettC.H., LattermannC., MaC.B.Current trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: part I, biology and biomechanics of reconstruction. Am J Sports Med.1999; 27: 821–830.
19.
GabrielM.T., WongE.K., WooS.L., YagiM., DebskiR.E.Distribution of in situ forces in the anterior cruciate ligament in response to rotatory loads. J Orthop Res.2004; 22: 85–89.
20.
GageG.Gait analysis. An essential tool in cerebral palsy. Clin Orthop.1993; 288: 126–134.
21.
GeorgoulisA.D., PapadonikolakisA., PapageorgiouC.D., MitsouA., StergiouN.Three-dimensional tibiofemoral kinematics of the anterior cruciate deficient and reconstructed knee during walking. Am J Sports Med.2003; 31: 75–79.
22.
GirgisF.G., MarshallJ.L., MonajemA.The cruciate ligaments of the knee joint. Anatomical, functional and experimental analysis. Clin Orthop.1975; 106: 216–231.
23.
HamadaM., ShinoK., HoribeS.Single- versus bi-socket anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autogenous multiple-stranded hamstring tendons with EndoButton femoral fixation: a prospective study. Arthroscopy.2001; 17: 801–807.
24.
HamnerD.L., BrownC.H., SteinerM.E., HeckerA.T., HayesW.C.Hamstring tendon grafts for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: biomechanical evaluation of the use of multiple strands and tensioning techniques. J Boint Joint Surg Am.1999; 81: 549–557.
25.
HoherJ., KanamoriA., ZeminskiJ., FuF.H., WooS.L.The position of the tibia during graft fixation affects knee kinematics and graft forces for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med.2001; 29: 771–776.
26.
IbrahimS., Al-KussaryI., Al-MisferA., Al-MutairiH.Q., GhafarS.A., El NoorT.A.Clinical evaluation of arthroscopically assisted ACL reconstruction: patellar tendon versus gracilis and semintendinosus autograft. Arthroscopy.2005; 21: 412–417.
27.
JacksonD., GasserS.Tibial tunnel placement in ACL reconstruction. Arthroscopy.1994; 10: 124–131.
28.
JanssonK.A., LinkoE., SandelinJ., HarilainenA.A prospective randomized study of patellar versus hamstring tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med.2003; 31: 12–18.
29.
KartusJ., MovinT., KarlssonJ.Donor-site morbidity and anterior knee problems after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autografts. Current concepts. Arthroscopy.2001; 17: 971–980.
30.
KennedyJ.C., WeinbergH.W., WilsonA.S.The anatomy and function of the anterior cruciate ligament as determined by clinical and morphological studies. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1974; 56: 223–235.
31.
LaxdalG., KartusJ., HansonL.A prospective randomized comparison of bone-patellar tendon-bone and hamstring grafts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy.2005; 21: 34–42.
32.
LoganM.C., WilliamsA., LavelleJ., GedroycW., FreemanM.Tibiofemoral kinematics following successful ACL reconstruction using dynamic multiple resonance imaging. Am J Sports Med.2004; 32: 984–992.
33.
LohJ.C., FukudaY., TsudaE., SteadmanR.J., FuF.H., WooS.L.Knee stability and graft function following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: comparison between 11 o'clock and 10 o'clock femoral tunnel placement. Arthroscopy.2003; 19: 297–304.
34.
LucchettiL., CappozzoA., CappelloA., Delia Croce Y Skin movement artefact assessment and compensation in the estimation of knee-joint kinematics. J Biomech.1998; 31: 977–984.
35.
MunetaT., SekiyaI., YagishitaK., OgiuchiT., YamanotoH., ShinomiyaK.Two-bundle reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament using semitendinosus tendon with EndoButtons: operative technique and preliminary results. Arthroscopy.1999; 15: 618–624.
36.
MusahlV., PlakseychukA., VanScyocA.Varying femoral tunnels between the anatomical footprint and isometric positions: effect on kinematics of the anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee. Am J Sports Med.2005; 33: 712–718.
37.
PinczewskiL.A., DeehanD.J., SalmonL.J., RussellV.J., ClingelefferA.A five-year comparison patellar tendon versus four-strand hamstring tendon autograft for arthroscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Am J Sports Med.2002; 30: 523–536.
38.
ReinschmidtC., van den BogertA.J., NiggB.M., LundbergA., MurphyN.Effect of skin movement on the analysis of skeletal knee joint motion during running. J Biomech.1997; 30: 729–732.
39.
RistanisS., GiakasG., PapageorgiouC.D., MoraitiT., StergiouN., GeorgoulisA.D.The effects of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on tibial rotation during pivoting after descending stairs. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthosc.2003; 11: 360–365.
40.
RistanisS., StergiouN., PatrasK., VasiliadisH.S., GiakasG., GeorgoulisA.D.Excessive tibial rotation during high-demand activities is not restored by anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy.2005; 21: 1323–1329.
41.
RowdenN., SherD., RogersG., SchindhelmK.Anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation: initial comparison of patellar tendon and semitendinosus autografts in young fresh cadavers. Am J Sports Med.1997; 25: 472–478.
42.
SchatzmannL., BrunnerP., StaubliH.U.Effect of cyclic preconditioning on the tensile properties of human quadriceps tendons and patellar ligaments. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc.1998; 6: S56–S61.
43.
ScoppJ.M., JasperL.E., BelkoffS.M., MoormanCTIIIThe effect of oblique femoral tunnel placement on rotational constraint of the knee reconstructed using patellar tendon autografts. Arthroscopy.2004; 20: 294–299.
44.
ShaiebM.D., KanD.M., ChangS.K., MarumotoJ.M., RichardsonA.B.A prospective randomized comparison of patellar tendon versus semitendinosus and gracilis tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med.2002; 30: 214–220.
45.
ShermanO.H., BanffyM.B.Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Which graft is best? Current concepts. Arthroscopy.2004; 20: 974–980.
46.
SpindlerK.P., KuhnJ.E., FreedmanK.B., MatthewsC.E., DittusR.S., HarrellFEJr.Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction autograft choice: bone-tendon-bone versus hamstring. Does it really matter? A systematic review. Am J Sports Med.2004; 32: 1986–1995.
47.
SteinerM., BrownC., ZarinsB., BrownsteinB., KovalP.S., StoneP.Measurement of anterior-posterior displacement of the knee. A comparison of the results with instrumented devices and with clinical examination. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1990; 72: 1307–1315.
48.
TashmanS., CollonD., AndersonK., KolowichP., AnderstW.Abnormal rotational knee motion during running after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med.2004; 32: 975–983.
49.
WebsterK.E., WittwerJ.E., O'BrienJ., FellerJ.A.Gait patterns after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction are related to graft type. Am J Sports Med.2005; 33: 247–254.
50.
WoltringH.J.A Fortran package for generalised, cross-validatory spline smoothing and differentiation. Advances in Engineering Software.1986; 8: 104–107.
51.
WooSL-Y, FoxR.J., SakaneM.Force and force distribution in the anterior cruciate ligament and its clinical implications. Sportorthopaedie-Sporttraumatologie.1997; 13: 37–48.
52.
WooS.L., KanamoriA., ZeminskiJ., YagiM., PapageorgiouC., FuF.H.The effectiveness of reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with hamstrings and patellar tendon. A cadaveric study comparing anterior tibial and rotational loads. J Bone Joint Surg Am.2002; 84: 907–914.
53.
YunesM., RichmondJ.C., EngelsE.A., PinczewskiL.A.Patellar versus hamstring tendons in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Arthroscopy.2001; 17: 248–257.
