Top

European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology

Published in:

01-05-2021 | Original Article

Functional results of allograft vs. autograft tendons in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction at 10-year follow-up

Authors: Alessandro Bistolfi, Marcello Capella, Claudio Guidotti, Luigi Sabatini, Stefano Artiaco, Alessandro Massè, Riccardo Ferracini

Published in: European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology | Issue 4/2021

Abstract

Purpose

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear is one of the most common sports injuries of the knee, and the arthroscopic reconstruction is the gold standard. Nevertheless, controversies about the surgical techniques and the type of graft still exist. Allografts have been considered by many surgeons as valid alternative to autografts. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of allografts compared to autografts at approximately 10 years of follow-up, investigating the level of physical activity currently performed by patients of each group.

Methods

Ninety-four patients, divided into two groups (allografts and autografts), have been retrospectively studied. The two groups did not significantly differ in preoperative sport activity level, age (mean 40.70 years for autografts and 41.23 for allografts) and characteristics. Allograft group received a fresh-frozen graft from the musculoskeletal tissues bank. Evaluations were made using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm score; every patient was interviewed for complications.

Results

The mean follow-up time was approximately 10 years for both groups, with a minimum of 8 years. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Average IKDC scores were 75.21 (SD 15.36) and 80.69 (SD 13.65) for the allograft and autograft groups, respectively. The mean Lysholm score was 87.57 (SD 9.43) for the allografts and 89.10 (SD 8.33) for the autografts. No major complications linked to the allograft tissue arose.

Conclusion

Both groups achieved almost the same functional outcomes at an average 10 years of follow-up, indicating fresh-frozen allografts as a reasonable alternative for ACL reconstruction.

Level of evidence

IV, Retrospective case–control study

Gans I, Retzky JS, Jones LC, Tanaka MJ (2018) Epidemiology of recurrent anterior cruciate ligament injuries in national collegiate athletic association sports: the injury surveillance program, 2004–2014. Orthop J Sports Med 6(6):1–7CrossRef

Jianzhong Hu, Jin Qu, DaqiXu, (2012) Allograft versus Autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an up-to-date meta-analysis of prospective studies. Int Orthop 37:311–320

Wang S, Zhang C, Cai Y, Lin X (2018) Autograft or Allograft? Irradiated or not? a contrast between autograft and allograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Arthroscopy 34(12):3258–3265CrossRef

Drocco L, Camazzola D, Ferracini R, Lustig S, Massè A, Bistolfi A et al (2018) Tripled semitendinosus with single harvesting is as effective but less invasive compared to standard gracilis-semitendinosus harvesting. Muscles Ligaments Tend J 7(4):564–572CrossRef

Barrett GR, Luber K, Replogle WH, Manley JL (2010) Allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the young, active patient: Tegner activity level and failure rate. Arthroscopy 26:1593–1601CrossRef

Harner CD, Irrgang JJ, Paul J, Dearwater S, Fu FH (1992) Loss of motion after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 20:499–506CrossRef

Jackson DW, Grood ES, Goldstein JD, Rosen MA, Kurzweil PR, Cummings JF, Simon TM (1993) A comparison of patellar tendon autograft and allograft used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the goat model. Am J Sports Med 21:176–185CrossRef

Malinin TI, Levitt RL, Bashore C, Temple HT, Mnaymneh W (2002) A study of retrieved allografts used to replace anterior cruciate ligaments. Arthroscopy 18:163–170CrossRef

Mroz TE, Joyce MJ, Steinmetz MP, Lieberman IH, Wang JC (2008) Musculoskeletal allograft risks and recalls in the United States. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 16:559–565CrossRef

10.

Vangsness CT Jr, Garcia IA, Mills CR, Kainer MA, Roberts MR, Moore TM (2003) Allograft transplantation in the knee: tissue regulation, procurement, processing, and sterilization. Am J Sports Med 31:474–481CrossRef

11.

McAllister DR, Joyce MJ, Mann BJ, Vangsness CT Jr (2007) Allograft update: the current status of tissue regulation, procurement, processing, and sterilization. Am J Sports Med 35:2148–2158CrossRef

12.

Padua R, Bondi R, Ceccarelli E, Bondi L, Romanini E, Zanoli G et al (2004) Italian version of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form: cross-cultural adaptation and validation. Arthroscopy 20(8):819–823CrossRef

13.

Cerciello S, Corona K, Morris BJ, Visonà E, Maccauro G, Maffulli N (2018) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Italian versions of the kujala, larsen, lysholm and fulkerson scores in patients with patellofemoral disorders. J OrthopTraumatol 19(1):18

14.

Sun K, Zhang J, Wang Y, Xia C, Zhang C, Yu T, Tian S (2011) Arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with at least 2.5 years’ follow-up comparing hamstring tendon autograft and irradiated allograft. Arthroscopy 27(9):1430–1438CrossRef

15.

Samuelsen B, Webster K, Johnson N, Hewett T, Krych A (2017) Hamstring autograft versus patellar tendon autograft for acl reconstruction: Is there a difference in graft failure rate? a meta-analysis of 47.613 patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475(10):2459–2468CrossRef

16.

Aglietti P, Buzzi R, Zaccherotti G, De Biase P (1994) Patellar tendon versus doubled semitendinosus and gracilis tendons for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 22:211–217CrossRef

17.

Andrade R, Pereira R, van Cingel R, Staal JB, Espregueira-Mendes J (2019) How should clinicians rehabilitate patients after ACL reconstruction? A systematic review of clinical practice guidelines with a focus on quality appraisal (AGREE II). Br J Sports Med 0: 1–9

18.

Tibor LM, Long JL, Schilling PL, Lilly RJ, Carpenter JE, Miller BS (2010) Clinical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of autograft versus allograft tissue. Sports Health 2(1):56–72CrossRef

19.

Bottoni CR, Smith EL, Shaha J, Shaha SS, Raybin SG, Tokish JM et al (2015) Autograft versus allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized clinical study with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 43(10):2501–2509CrossRef

20.

Bisciotti GN, Quaglia A, Belli A, Carimati G, Volpi P (2016) Return to sports after ACL reconstruction: a new functional test protocol. Muscles Ligaments Tend 12–6(4):499–509

21.

Prodromos C, Joyce B, Shi K (2007) A meta-analysis of stability of autografts compared to allografts after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15(7):851–856CrossRef

22.

DiBartola AC, Everhart JS, Kaeding CC, Magnussen RA, Flanigan DC (2016) Maximum load to failure of high dose versus low dose gamma irradiation of anterior cruciate ligament allografts: a meta-analysis. Knee 23(5):755–762CrossRef

23.

Zeng C, Gao SG, Li H, Yang T, Luo W, Li YS et al (2016) Autograft versus allograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and systematic review of overlapping systematic reviews. Arthroscopy 32(1):153–163CrossRef

24.

Yao LW, Wang Q, Zhang L, Zhang C, Zhang B, Zhang YJ et al (2015) Patellar tendon autograft versus patellar tendon allograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25(2):355–365CrossRef

25.

Rihn JA, Irrgang JJ, Chhabra A, Fu FH, Harner CD (2006) Does irradiation affect the clinical outcome of patellar tendon allograft ACL reconstruction? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14(9):885–896CrossRef

26.

Rai S, Jin SY, Rai B, Tamang N, Huang W, Liu XZ et al (2018) A single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) using hamstring tendon autograft and tibialis anterior tendon allograft: a comparative study. Curr Med Sci 38(5):818–826CrossRef

27.

Mayr HO, Willkomm D, Stoehr A, Schettle M, Suedkamp NP, Bernstein A et al (2012) Revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon allograft and autograft: 2- and 5-year results. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132(6):867–874CrossRef

28.

Yu-Hua J, Peng-Fei S (2015) Comparison of clinical outcome of autograft and allograft reconstruction for anterior cruciate ligament tears. Chin Med J (Engl) 128(23):3163–3166CrossRef

29.

Singhal MC, Gardiner JR, Johnson DL (2007) Failure of primary anterior cruciate ligament surgery using anterior tibialis allograft. Arthroscopy 23(5):469–475CrossRef

30.

Shino K, Inoue M, Horibe S, Hamada M, Ono K (1990) Reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament using allogeneic tendon. Long-term followup. Am J Sports Med 18(5):457–465CrossRef

31.

Kaeding CC, Pedroza AD, Reinke EK, Huston LJ, Consortium M, Spindler KP (2015) Risk factors and predictors of subsequent ACL injury in either knee after ACL reconstruction: prospective analysis of 2488 primary ACL reconstructions from the MOON cohort. Am J Sports Med 43(7):1583–90CrossRef

32.

Wasserstein D, Sheth U, Cabrera A, Spindler KP (2015) A Systematic Review of Failed Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Autograft Compared With Allograft in Young Patients. Sports Health 7(3):207–16CrossRef

Title: Functional results of allograft vs. autograft tendons in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction at 10-year follow-up
Authors: Alessandro Bistolfi
Marcello Capella
Claudio Guidotti
Luigi Sabatini
Stefano Artiaco
Alessandro Massè
Riccardo Ferracini
Publication date: 01-05-2021
Publisher: Springer Paris
Published in: European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology / Issue 4/2021
Print ISSN: 1633-8065
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1068
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-020-02823-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Functional results of allograft vs. autograft tendons in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction at 10-year follow-up

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 4/2021

Osteomyelitis of the femur effectively treated with medulloscopy debridement: a case report

Comparison of 5-year postoperative results between standard-length stems and short stems in one-stage bilateral total hip arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

Pipkin type IV femoral head fractures: a case series and review of literature

Software simulations of changing offsets and thus soft tissue tension when revising anatomic to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in convertible platform systems

Deviation of the centre of rotation of the femoral head in dysplastic hip joints

Stabilization of the radial head with the palmaris longus or the gracilis tendon: an anatomical feasibility study