The best means of ensuring knee stability after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains a core debate in sports medicine.
Hypothesis
There is no difference between ACL reconstruction with patellar tendon or hamstring tendon autografts with regard to postoperative knee laxity and instability.
Study Design
Meta-analysis of individual patient data.
Methods
Pooled analysis of individual patient data from 6 published randomized clinical trials included 423 patients with symptomatic unilateral anterior cruciate ligament injury randomly assigned to reconstruction with patellar tendon or hamstring tendon autograft. Knee instability, defined as a positive pivot-shift test result, was the primary outcome, and knee laxity, defined as a positive Lachman test result, was the secondary outcome. Odds ratios were computed before and after adjustment for potential confounders and trial effect. Regression analyses were performed to look for effects of covariates on outcomes, and mixed-effects models were used to account for a trial effect. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore the effects of missing data and excluding each trial.
Results
Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon autograft was significantly associated with a decreased risk of a positive pivot-shift test result (adjusted odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.24–0.86; P = .016). The risk of having a positive Lachman test result was not significantly different between the 2 groups. The estimated treatment effect was not substantially changed by differences in handling missing data or exclusion of any of the trials. A positive pivot-shift test result was more common in female (P = .003) and younger patients (P = .017).
Conclusion
Postoperative knee instability was less common after ACL reconstruction with patellar tendon autograft than with hamstring tendon autograft.
ArnoldMPLieDTVerdonschotNde GraafRAmisAAvan KampenA. The remains of anterior cruciate ligament graft tension after cyclic knee motion. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33(4):536–542.
3.
BiauDJTournouxCKatsahianSSchranzPNizardR. ACL reconstruction: a meta-analysis of functional scores. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;458:180–187.
4.
BiauDJTournouxCKatsahianSSchranzPJNizardRS. Bone–patellar tendon–bone autografts versus hamstring autografts for reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament: meta-analysis. BMJ. 2006;332(7548):995–1001.
5.
BrandJJrWeilerACabornDNBrownCHJrJohnsonDL. Graft fixation in cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2000;28(5):761–774.
6.
BrewerBWCorneliusAEVan RaalteJL. Age-related differences in predictors of adherence to rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Athl Train. 2003;38(2):158–162.
BrookesSTWhitleyEPetersTJMulheranPAEggerMDavey SmithG. Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives. Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(33):1–56.
9.
CorryISWebbJMClingelefferAJPinczewskiLA. 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(4):444–454.
10.
EjerhedLKartusJSernertNKohlerKKarlssonJ. 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.
11.
FellerJAWebsterKE. A randomized comparison of patellar tendon and hamstring tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31(4):564–573.
12.
FithianDCPaxtonLWGoltzDH. Fate of the anterior cruciate ligament–injured knee. Orthop Clin North Am. 2002;33(4):621–636.
13.
ForsterMCForsterIW. Patellar tendon or four-strand hamstring? A systematic review of autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee. 2005;12(3):225–230.
14.
GalwayHRMacIntoshDL. The lateral pivot shift: a symptom and sign of anterior cruciate ligament insufficiency. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;147:45–50.
15.
GobbiADomzalskiMPascualJ. Comparison of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in male and female athletes using the patellar tendon and hamstring autografts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2004;12(6):534–539.
16.
GoldblattJPFitzsimmonsSEBalkERichmondJC. Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: meta-analysis of patellar tendon versus hamstring tendon autograft. Arthroscopy. 2005;21(7):791–803.
17.
HamnerDLBrownCHJrSteinerMEHeckerATHayesWC. Hamstring tendon grafts for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: biomechanical evaluation of the use of multiple strands and tensioning techniques. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81(4):549–557.
18.
HandlMDrzikMCerulliG. Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: dynamic strain evaluation of the graft. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2007;15(3):233–241.
19.
HarilainenALinkoESandelinJ. Randomized prospective study of ACL reconstruction with interference screw fixation in patellar tendon autografts versus femoral metal plate suspension and tibial post fixation in hamstring tendon autografts: 5-year clinical and radiological follow-up results. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006;14(6):517–528.
20.
HarveyAThomasNPAmisAA. Fixation of the graft in reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(5):593–603.
21.
HeijneAWernerS. Early versus late start of open kinetic chain quadriceps exercises after ACL reconstruction with patellar tendon or hamstring grafts: a prospective randomized outcome study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2007;15(4):402–414.
22.
HeoMLeonAC. Comparison of statistical methods for analysis of clustered binary observations. Stat Med. 2005;24(6):911–923.
23.
HillPFRussellVJSalmonLJPinczewskiLA. The influence of supplementary tibial fixation on laxity measurements after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendons in female patients. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33(1):94–101.
24.
HowellSMGittinsMEGottliebJETrainaSMZoellnerTM. The relationship between the angle of the tibial tunnel in the coronal plane and loss of flexion and anterior laxity after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29(5):567–574.
25.
IshibashiYRudyTWLivesayGAStoneJDFuFHWooSL. The effect of anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation site at the tibia on knee stability: evaluation using a robotic testing system. Arthroscopy. 1997;13(2):177–182.
26.
JarvinenTLNurmiJTSievanenH. Bone density and insertion torque as predictors of anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation strength. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32(6):1421–1429.
27.
JengGTScottJRBurmeisterLF. A comparison of meta-analytic results using literature vs individual patient data: paternal cell immunization for recurrent miscarriage. JAMA. 1995;274(10):830–836.
28.
JonssonHRiklund-AhlstromKLindJ. Positive pivot shift after ACL reconstruction predicts later osteoarthrosis: 63 patients followed 5–9 years after surgery. Acta Orthop Scand. 2004;75(5):594–599.
29.
KapoorBClementDJKirkleyAMaffulliN. Current practice in the management of anterior cruciate ligament in the United Kingdom. Br J Sports Med. 2004;38(5):542–544.
30.
KhalfayanEESharkeyPFAlexanderAHBrucknerJDBynumEB. The relationship between tunnel placement and clinical results after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 1996;24(3):335–341.
31.
Khodadadyan-KlostermannCvon SeebachMTaylorWRDudaGNHaasNP. Distribution of bone mineral density with age and gender in the proximal tibia. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2004;19(4):370–376.
32.
KocherMSSteadmanJRBriggsKKSterettWIHawkinsRJ. Relationships between objective assessment of ligament stability and subjective assessment of symptoms and function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32(3):629–634.
33.
KousaPJarvinenTLVihavainenMKannusPJarvinenM. The fixation strength of six hamstring tendon graft fixation devices in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, part I: femoral site. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31(2):174–181.
34.
KousaPJarvinenTLVihavainenMKannusPJarvinenM. The fixation strength of six hamstring tendon graft fixation devices in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, part II: tibial site. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31(2):182–188.
35.
LaxdalGKartusJHanssonLHeidvallMEjerhedLKarlssonJ. A prospective randomized comparison of bone–patellar tendon–bone and hamstring grafts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2005;21(1):34–42.
36.
LucieRSWiedelJDMessnerDG. The acute pivot shift: clinical correlation. Am J Sports Med. 1984;12(3):189–191.
37.
LymanGHKudererNM. The strengths and limitations of meta-analyses based on aggregate data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005;5(1):14.
38.
MalangaGAAndrusSNadlerSFMcLeanJ. Physical examination of the knee: a review of the original test description and scientific validity of common orthopedic tests. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84(4):592–603.
39.
MarkolfKLHameSHunterDM. Effects of femoral tunnel placement on knee laxity and forces in an anterior cruciate ligament graft. J Orthop Res. 2002;20(5):1016–1024.
40.
MarxRGJonesECAngelMWickiewiczTLWarrenRF. Beliefs and attitudes of members of the American Academy of Surgeons regarding the treatment of anterior cruciate ligament. Arthroscopy. 2003;19(7):762–770.
41.
MirzaFMaiDDKirkleyAFowlerPJAmendolaA. Management of injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament: results of a survey of orthopaedic surgeons in Canada. Clin J Sport Med. 2000;10(2):85–88.
42.
MunetaTKogaHMochizukiT. A prospective randomized study of 4-strand semitendinosus tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction comparing single-bundle and double-bundle techniques. Arthroscopy. 2007;23(6):618–628.
43.
NoojinFKBarrettGRHartzogCWNashCR. Clinical comparison of intraarticular anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autogenous semitendinosus and gracilis tendons in men versus women. Am J Sports Med. 2000;28(6):783–789.
44.
NoyesFRStablerCL. A system for grading articular cartilage lesions at arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med. 1989;17(4):505–513.
45.
PhillipsBBCainELDlabachJAAzarFM. Correlation of interference screw insertion torque with depth of placement in the tibial tunnel using a quadrupled semitendinosusgracilis graft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2004;20(10):1026–1029.
46.
ProdromosCCJoyceBTShiKKellerBL. A meta-analysis of stability after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction as a function of hamstring versus patellar tendon graft and fixation type. Arthroscopy. 2005;21(10):1202.
47.
R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2006. Available at: http://www.R-project.org.
48.
SajovicMVengustVKomadinaRTavcarRSkazaK. A prospective, randomized comparison of semitendinosus and gracilis tendon versus patellar tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: five-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34(12):1933–1940.
49.
SalmonLJRefshaugeKMRussellVJRoeJPLinklaterJPinczewskiLA. Gender differences in outcome after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendon autograft. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34(4):621–629.
50.
SchefflerSUSudkampNPGockenjanAHoffmannRFWeilerA. Biomechanical comparison of hamstring and patellar tendon graft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques: the impact of fixation level and fixation method under cyclic loading. Arthroscopy. 2002;18(3):304–315.
51.
SchwartzDLellouchJ. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J Chronic Dis. 1967;20(8):637–648.
52.
SpindlerKPKuhnJEFreedmanKBMatthewsCEDittusRSHarrellFEJr. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction autograft choice: bone-tendon-bone versus hamstring: does it really matter? A systematic review. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32(8):1986–1995.
53.
SteinerMEHeckerATBrownCHJrHayesWC. Anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation: comparison of hamstring and patellar tendon grafts. Am J Sports Med. 1994;22(2):240–246; discussion 246–247.
54.
StewartLAParmarMK. Meta-analysis of the literature or of individual patient data: is there a difference?Lancet. 1993;341(8842):418–422.
55.
StramDOLeeJW. Variance components testing in the longitudinal mixed effects model. Biometrics. 1994;50:1171–1177.
56.
TomitaFYasudaKMikamiSSakaiTYamazakiSTohyamaH. Comparisons of intraosseous graft healing between the doubled tendon graft and the bone–patellar tendon–bone graft in anterior ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2001;17(5):461–476.
57.
TorgJSConradWKalenV. Clinical diagnosis of anterior cruciate ligament instability in the athlete. Am J Sports Med. 1976;4(2):84–93.
58.
WilsonTWZafutaMPZobitzM. A biomechanical analysis of matched bone–patellar tendon–bone and double-looped semitendinosus and gracilis tendon grafts. Am J Sports Med. 1999;27(2):202–207.
59.
YunesMRichmondJCEngelsEAPinczewskiLA. Patellar versus hamstring tendons in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Arthroscopy. 2001;17(3):248–257.
60.
ZaffagniniSMarcacciMLo PrestiMGiordanoGIaconoFNeriMP. Prospective and randomized evaluation of ACL reconstruction with three techniques: a clinical and radiographic evaluation at 5 years follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006;14(11):1060–1069.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
