Abstract
Background:
Autograft choice in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains controversial, with increasing interest in the usage of quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft versus traditional hamstring tendon (HT) use. The current study undertakes an in-depth review and comparison of the clinical and functional outcomes of QT and HT autografts in ACLR.
Hypothesis:
The QT autograft is equivalent to the HT autograft and there will be little or no significant difference in the outcomes between these 2 autografts.
Study Design:
Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.
Methods:
The PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL databases were systematically searched from their inception until November 2020. All observational studies comparing ACLR QT and HT autografts were assessed for their methodological quality. Patient outcomes were compared according to patient-reported outcome measures (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Cincinnati, Lysholm, Tegner, and visual analog scale [VAS] measures), knee extensor and flexor torque limb symmetry indices (LSIs), hamstring to quadriceps (H/Q) ratios, functional hop capacity, knee laxity, ipsilateral graft failure, and contralateral injury.
Results:
A total of 20 observational studies comprising 28,621 patients (QT = 2550; HT = 26,071) were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. In comparison with patients who received an HT autograft, those who received a QT autograft had similar postoperative Lysholm (mean difference [MD], 0.67;
Conclusion:
In this meta-analysis, the use of the QT autograft was equivalent to the HT autograft in ACLR, with comparable graft failure and clinical and functional outcomes observed. However, HT autografts were associated with better LSI knee extensor strength.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
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.
