Bone and Joint Institute
Bone Versus All Soft Tissue Quadriceps Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1-1-2020
Journal
Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
URL with Digital Object Identifier
10.1016/j.arthro.2020.10.018
Abstract
© 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America Purpose: To examine existing literature on objective and patient-reported outcomes and complications after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with bone-quadriceps-tendon (B-QT) or soft tissue-quadriceps tendon (S-QT) to further clarify the role of graft type in primary ACLR. Methods: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Embase, and Medline were searched in October 2019 for English-language, human studies of all evidence levels on patients undergoing primary ACLR with B-QT or S-QT autograft. Results: 24 of 1,381 studies satisfied criteria, with 20 using B-QT (1,534 patients, mean age 29.6 years [range 14 to 59], mean follow-up 41.2 months [range 12 to 120]) and 5 using S-QT (181 patients, mean age 32.4 years [range 15 to 58), mean follow-up 25.5 months [range 12 to 46]). International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores were 67.3 to 89.5 with B-QT and 80.4 to 81.6 with S-QT. Lysholm scores were 85.7 to 97.4 with B-QT and 81.6 to 89.2 with S-QT. More B-QT patients demonstrated rotatory laxity on pivot shift compared with S-QT (0% to 39% versus 0%, respectively). The most common complication was graft rupture, and no differences were observed between graft choices (B-QT 0% to 9% versus S-QT 0% to 3.8%). Conclusions: The main findings from this review report that more B-QT patients demonstrated postoperative rotatory instability than S-QT patients, and that there are no differences in graft rupture between the 2 graft choices. Although statistical conclusions may not be drawn because of heterogeneity in reporting, it appears that the B-QT group featured much wider major and minor complication profiles. Level of evidence: IV, systematic review of level I–IV studies
