Top

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

Published in:

09-11-2023 | KNEE

A hamstring autograft diameter ≤ 8 mm is a safe option for smaller, lighter and female athletes who want to return to pivoting sports after ACL reconstruction

Results from a retrospective evaluation of a local ACL register

Authors: Nicole Boots, Nicky van Melick, Rob Bogie

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 12/2023

Abstract

Purpose

To investigate the association between hamstring autograft diameter and ACL graft failure rate in athletes who successfully returned to pivoting sports after ACL reconstruction.

Methods

Retrospective evaluation of ACL graft failure rates in athletes who underwent ACL reconstruction with all-inside hamstring autograft and successfully returned to pivoting sports following postoperative rehabilitation. Athletes were divided into a ≤ 8 mm group and a > 8 mm group. Data about return to pivoting sports and ACL graft failures after ACL reconstruction were collected via a digital questionnaire. ACL graft failures were in all cases confirmed by an orthopaedic surgeon and/or MRI. The association between hamstring autograft diameter and ACL graft failure rate was investigated using a Fisher’s exact test in the subgroup of athletes who completed the digital questionnaire and returned to pivoting sports.

Results

Two-hundred and twenty-nine of the 422 athletes who completed the digital questionnaire (54.2%) returned to a pivoting sport and were included for final analyses. Ninety-seven (42.4%) of the athletes who returned to sport were in the ≤ 8 mm group (8 graft failures) and 132 (57.6%) in the > 8 mm group (10 graft failures). There were significantly more women (49.5 and 13.6% respectively; p < 0.001) and significantly smaller (1.75 and 1.81 m respectively; p < 0.001), lighter (72.2 and 79.6 kg respectively; p < 0.001) and younger (23.6 and 26.1 years old respectively; p = 0.015) athletes in the ≤ 8 mm group compared to the > 8 mm group. There was no significant association between hamstring autograft diameter and ACL graft failure rate.

Conclusion

A hamstring autograft diameter of ≤ 8 mm is a legitimate option for smaller, lighter and female athletes without increasing the risk for ACL graft failure.

Level of evidence

III.

Acevedo RJ, Rivera-Vega A, Miranda G, Micheo W (2014) Anterior cruciate ligament injury: identification of risk factors and prevention strategies. Curr Sports Med Rep 13(3):186–191CrossRefPubMed

Agarwal N, Monketh J, Volpin A (2022) Clinical and mechanical outcomes in isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction vs additional lateral extra-articular tenodesis or anterolateral ligament reconstruction. World J Orthop 13(7):662–675CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Anand BS, Feller JA, Richmond AK, Webster KE (2016) Return-to-sport outcomes after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery. Am J Sports Med 44(3):580–584CrossRefPubMed

Ardern CL, Taylor NF, Feller JA, Webster KE (2014) Fifty-five per cent return to competitive sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis including aspects of physical functioning and contextual factors. Br J Sports Med 48(21):1543–1552CrossRefPubMed

Charlton WP, John TA, Ciccotti MG, Harrison N, Schweitzer M (2002) Differences in femoral notch anatomy between men and women: a Magnetic Resonance Imaging study. Am J Sports Med 30(3):329–333CrossRefPubMed

Conte EJ, Hyatt AE, Gatt CJ, Dhawan A (2014) Hamstring autograft size can be predicted and is a potential risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failure. Arthroscopy 30(7):882–890CrossRefPubMed

DeFazio MW, Curry EJ, Gustin MJ, Sing DC, Abdul-Rassoul H, Ma R et al (2020) Return to sport after ACL reconstruction with a BTB versus hamstring tendon autograft: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthop J Sports Med 8(12):2325967120964919CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Dietvorst M, van der Steen M, van den Besselaar M, Janssen RP (2023) Height is a predictor of hamstring tendon length and ACL graft characteristics in adolescents. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 24(1):563. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06705-2CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Fritsch B, Figueroa F, Semay B (2017) Graft preparation technique to optimize hamstring graft diameter for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthrosc Tech 6(6):e2169–e2175CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Hefti F, Müller W, Jakob RP, Stäubli HU (1993) Evaluation of knee ligament injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1(3–4):226–234CrossRefPubMed

11.

Inderhaug E, Drogset JO, Lygre SHL, Gifstad T (2020) No effect of graft size or body mass index on risk of revision after ACL reconstruction using hamstrings autograft. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28:707–713CrossRefPubMed

12.

Itoh M, Itou J, Okazaki K, Iwasaki K (2023) Estimation of failure risk by 0.5-mm differences in autologous hamstring graft diameter in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med. https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465221150654CrossRefPubMed

13.

Magnussen RA, Lawrence JT, West RL, Toth AP, Taylor DC, Garrett WE (2012) Graft size and patient age are predictors of early revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft. Arthroscopy 28(4):526–531CrossRefPubMed

14.

Mariscalco MW, Flanigan DC, Mitchell J (2013) The influence of hamstring autograft size on patient reported outcomes and risk of revision following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a MOON cohort study. Arthroscopy 29(12):1948–1953CrossRefPubMed

15.

van Melick N, van Cingel RE, Brooijmans F, Neeter C, van Tienen T, Hullegie W et al (2016) Evidence-based clinical practice update: practice guidelines for anterior cruciate ligament rehabilitation based on a systematic review and multidisciplinary consensus. Br J Sports Med 50(24):1506–1515CrossRefPubMed

16.

van Melick N, Pronk Y, Nijhuis-van der Sanden M, Rutten S, van Tienen T, Hoogeboom T (2022) Meeting movement quantity or quality return to sport criteria is associated with reduced second ACL injury rate. J Orthop Res 40(1):117–128CrossRefPubMed

17.

Mirzayan R, Chang RN, Royse KE, Prentice HA, Maletis GB (2023) No difference in revision risk between autologous hamstring graft less than 8 mm versus hybrid graft 8 mm or larger in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 31:3465–3473CrossRefPubMed

18.

Mishra P, Goyal A, Gupta H, Bhavani P, Lal H, Kumar S (2022) Correlation between height and semitendinosus tendon length, prediction of minimum semitendinosus tendon length based on height-an easy and accurate method. J Clin Orthop Trauma 31:101918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2022.101918CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Papaloucas N (2018) All-Inside technique for ACL-reconstruction using a FlipCutter^® and the TightRope^® system. Surg Technol Int 32:337–345PubMed

20.

Park SY, Oh H, Park S, Lee JH, Lee SH, Yoon KH (2013) Factors predicting hamstring tendon autograft diameters and resulting failure rates after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(5):1111–1118CrossRefPubMed

21.

Ramkumar PN, Hadley MD, Jones MH, Farrow LD (2018) Hamstring autograft in ACL reconstruction: a 13-year predictive analysis of anthropometric factors and surgeon trends relating to graft size. Orthop J Sports Med 6(6):2325967118779788. https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967118779788CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Snaebjörnsson T, Hamrin-Senorski E, Ayeni OR, Alentorn-Geli E, Krupic F, Norberg F et al (2017) Graft diameter as a predictor for revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and KOOS and EQ-5D values: a cohort study from the Swedish national knee ligament register based on 2240 patients. Am J Sports Med 45(9):2092–2097CrossRefPubMed

23.

Snaebjörnsson T, Hamrin-Senorski E, Svantesson E, Karlsson L, Engebretsen L, Karlsson J et al (2019) Graft diameter and graft type as predictors of anterior cruciate ligament revision: a cohort study including 18,425 patients from the Swedish and Norwegian national knee ligament registries. J Bone Jt Surg AM 101(20):1812–1820CrossRef

24.

Snaebjörnsson T, Svantesson E, Sundemo D, Westin O, Sansone M, Engebretsen L et al (2019) Young age and high BMI are predictors of early revision surgery after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cohort study from the Swedish and Norwegian knee ligament registries based on 30,747 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27(11):3583–3591CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Spragg L, Chen J, Mirzayan R, Love R, Maletis G (2016) The effect of autologous hamstring graft diameter on the likelihood for revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 44(6):1475–1481CrossRefPubMed

26.

Tang SP, Wan KH, Lee RH, Wong KK, Wong KK (2020) Influence of hamstring autograft diameter on graft failure rate in Chinese population after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Asia Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol 22:45–2248PubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Wang H, Tao M, Shi Q, He K, Cheng CK (2022) Graft diameter should reflect the size of the native anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) to improve the outcome of ACL reconstruction: a finite element analysis. Bioengineering 9(10):507. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9100507CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Wiggins AJ, Grandhi RK, Schneider DK, Stanfield D, Webster KE, Myer GD (2016) Risk of secondary injury in younger athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med 44(7):1861–1876CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Zhao D, Pan J, Lin FZ, Luo MH, Liang GH, Zen LF et al (2023) Risk factors for revision or rerupture after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med 51(11):3053–3075CrossRefPubMed

Title: A hamstring autograft diameter ≤ 8 mm is a safe option for smaller, lighter and female athletes who want to return to pivoting sports after ACL reconstruction
Results from a retrospective evaluation of a local ACL register
Authors: Nicole Boots
Nicky van Melick
Rob Bogie
Publication date: 09-11-2023
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 12/2023
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-023-07640-4

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

A hamstring autograft diameter ≤ 8 mm is a safe option for smaller, lighter and female athletes who want to return to pivoting sports after ACL reconstruction

Results from a retrospective evaluation of a local ACL register

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Level of evidence

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Level of evidence

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 12/2023

The V angle compliments radiographic assessment of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations by differentiating between Rockwood types III versus V and by considering dynamic horizontal translation in coronal radiographs

Increased risk of reoperation and failure to attain clinically relevant improvement following autologous chondrocyte implantation of the knee in female patients and individuals with previous surgeries: a time-to-event analysis based on the German cartilage registry (KnorpelRegister DGOU)

Anterior cruciate ligament femoral footprint is oblong-ovate, triangular, or two-tears shaped in healthy young adults: three-dimensional MRI analysis

Improved accuracy of implant placement with an imageless handheld robotic system compared to conventional instrumentation in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial using CT-based assessment of radiological outcomes

Time required to achieve clinically significant outcomes after arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction

Limited evidence in support of bone marrow aspirate concentrate as an additive to the bone marrow stimulation for osteochondral lesions of the talus: a systematic review and meta-analysis