Top

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

Published in:

01-08-2018 | Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine

Graft sources do not affect to the outcome of transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review

Authors: Yong Seuk Lee, Seung Hoon Lee, O-Sung Lee

Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Issue 8/2018

Abstract

Introduction

Despite numerous published reports on posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction in the past 30 years, the ideal graft source remains unclear, and few objective scientific data have been published that thoroughly evaluate the long-term outcomes according to the graft source. We, therefore, conducted a systematic review of available high-quality comparative studies that evaluated clinical and objective stability testing to compare the different graft sources for PCL reconstruction.

Materials and methods

Eight articles were included in the final analysis. There were two level II and six level III studies. Autograft included 4-strand hamstring grafts (SHGs), 7-SHGs, quadriceps tendon, and patellar tendon. Allografts included Achilles tendon and tibialis anterior tendon. Hybrid graft and a ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS) were used in one study each. Comparison was performed between autografts and allografts in three studies, between different autografts in two studies, between autograft and LARS in one study, among three different grafts in one study, and between 4 and 7-SHGs in one study.

Results

Most studies reported no statistically significant differences in the clinical results, except for one study that compared 4- and 7-SHG. Stability was similar or superior in a comparison between autografts and allografts, and was not statistically different between different autografts or between 4-SHG and LARS. However, more-stranded HG showed better stability than that of the less-stranded HG. Complications were more frequent with autografts.

Conclusion

Using a comprehensive analysis of the current literature, the authors could not identify an individual graft source with clearly superior clinical results, compared with other graft sources. However, autografts, especially 4-SHGs, showed similar or superior stability to irradiated allografts. Therefore, the graft source has a minimal effect on the clinical outcome, but it could have some effects on stability in single bundle transtibial PCL reconstruction.

Ahn JH, Lee YS, Choi SH, Chang MJ, Lee DK (2013) Single-bundle transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a bioabsorbable cross-pin tibial back side fixation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:1023–1028CrossRef

Ahn JH, Yoo JC, Wang JH (2005) Posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: double-loop hamstring tendon autograft versus Achilles tendon allograft–clinical results of a minimum 2-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 21:965–969CrossRef

Ahn S, Lee YS, Song YD, Chang CB, Kang SB, Choi YS (2016) Does surgical reconstruction produce better stability than conservative treatment in the isolated PCL injuries? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136:811–819CrossRef

Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, Guyatt GH, Harbour RT, Haugh MC, Henry D, Hill S, Jaeschke R, Leng G, Liberati A, Magrini N, Mason J, Middleton P, Mrukowicz J, O’Connell D, Oxman AD, Phillips B, Schunemann HJ, Edejer T, Varonen H, Vist GE, Williams JW Jr, Zaza S (2004) Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 328:1490CrossRef

Chen CH, Chen WJ, Shih CH (2002) Arthroscopic reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament: a comparison of quadriceps tendon autograft and quadruple hamstring tendon graft. Arthroscopy 18:603–612CrossRef

Chen CH, Chou SW, Chen WJ, Shih CH (2004) Fixation strength of three different graft types used in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 12:371–375PubMed

Ellis HB, Matheny LM, Briggs KK, Pennock AT, Steadman JR (2012) Outcomes and revision rate after bone-patellar tendon-bone allograft versus autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in patients aged 18 years or younger with closed physes. Arthroscopy 28:1819–1825CrossRef

Foster TE, Wolfe BL, Ryan S, Silvestri L, Kaye EK (2010) Does the graft source really matter in the outcome of patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? An evaluation of autograft versus allograft reconstruction results: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med 38:189–199CrossRef

Gwinner C, Weiler A, Denecke T, Rogasch JMM, Boeth H, Jung TM (2018) Degenerative changes after posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction are irrespective of posterior knee stability: MRI-based long-term results. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 138:377–385CrossRef

10.

Hudgens JL, Gillette BP, Krych AJ, Stuart MJ, May JH, Levy BA (2013) Allograft versus autograft in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an evidence-based systematic review. J Knee Surg 26:109–115CrossRef

11.

Jain V, Goyal A, Mohindra M, Kumar R, Joshi D, Chaudhary D (2016) A comparative analysis of arthroscopic double-bundle versus single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring tendon autograft. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136:1555–1561CrossRef

12.

Jung YB, Jung HJ, Tae SK, Lee YS, Yang DL (2006) Tensioning of remnant posterior cruciate ligament and reconstruction of anterolateral bundle in chronic posterior cruciate ligament injury. Arthroscopy 22:329–338CrossRef

13.

Jung YB, Tae SK, Jung HJ, Lee KH (2004) Replacement of the torn posterior cruciate ligament with a mid-third patellar tendon graft with use of a modified tibial inlay method. J Bone Jt Surg Am 86-a:1878–1883CrossRef

14.

Kennedy NI, LaPrade RF, Goldsmith MT, Faucett SC, Rasmussen MT, Coatney GA, Engebretsen L, Wijdicks CA (2014) Posterior cruciate ligament graft fixation angles, part 1: biomechanical evaluation for anatomic single-bundle reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 42:2338–2345CrossRef

15.

Kraeutler MJ, Bravman JT, McCarty EC (2013) Bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft versus allograft in outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of 5182 patients. Am J Sports Med 41:2439–2448CrossRef

16.

Lee YS, Ahn JH, Jung YB, Wang JH, Yoo JC, Jung HJ, Kang BJ (2007) Transtibial double bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using TransFix tibial fixation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15:973–977CrossRef

17.

Lee YS, Han SH, Kim JH (2012) A biomechanical comparison of tibial back side fixation between suspensory and expansion mechanisms in trans-tibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee 19:55–59CrossRef

18.

Li J, Kong F, Gao X, Shen Y, Gao S (2016) Prospective randomized comparison of knee stability and proprioception for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autograft, hybrid graft, and γ-irradiated allograft. Arthroscopy 32:2548–2555CrossRef

19.

Li X, Yin L, Chen ZY, Zhu L, Wang HL, Chen W, Yang G, Zhang YZ (2014) The effect of tourniquet use in total knee arthroplasty: grading the evidence through an updated meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 24:973–986CrossRef

20.

Lin YC, Chen SK, Liu TH, Cheng YM, Chou PP (2013) Arthroscopic transtibial single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using patellar tendon graft compared with hamstring tendon graft. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 133:523–530CrossRef

21.

Mariscalco MW, Magnussen RA, Mehta D, Hewett TE, Flanigan DC, Kaeding CC (2014) Autograft versus nonirradiated allograft tissue for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med 42:492–499CrossRef

22.

Marrale J, Morrissey MC, Haddad FS (2007) A literature review of autograft and allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15:690–704CrossRef

23.

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol 62:1006–1012CrossRef

24.

Pujji O, Keswani N, Collier N, Black M, Doos L (2017) Evaluating the functional results and complications of autograft vs allograft use for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: a systematic review. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 9:6833CrossRef

25.

Race A, Amis AA (1998) PCL reconstruction. In vitro biomechanical comparison of ‘isometric’ versus single and double-bundled ‘anatomic’ grafts. J Bone Jt Surg Br 80:173–179CrossRef

26.

Song EK, Park HW, Ahn YS, Seon JK (2014) Transtibial versus tibial inlay techniques for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: long-term follow-up study. Am J Sports Med 42:2964–2971CrossRef

27.

Sterne JA, et. al (2016) ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 355:i4919CrossRef

28.

Sun X, Zhang J, Qu X, Zheng Y (2015) Arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with allograft versus autograft. Arch Med Sci 11:395–401CrossRef

29.

Tornese D, Bandi M, Volpi P, Schonhuber H, Denti M, Gabriele G, Melegati G (2008) Patellar tendon graft vs. Semitendinosus and Gracilis graft for posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: An isokinetic and functional study one year after the operation. Isokinet Exerc Sci 16:133–137CrossRef

30.

Wang CJ, Chan YS, Weng LH, Yuan LJ, Chen HS (2004) Comparison of autogenous and allogenous posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions of the knee. Injury 35:1279–1285CrossRef

31.

Xu X, Huang T, Liu Z, Wen H, Ye L, Hu Y, Yu H, Pan X (2014) Hamstring tendon autograft versus LARS artificial ligament for arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in a long-term follow-up. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 134:1753–1759CrossRef

32.

Zhao J, Huangfu X (2007) Arthroscopic single-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: retrospective review of 4- versus 7-strand hamstring tendon graft. Knee 14:301–305CrossRef

Title: Graft sources do not affect to the outcome of transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review
Authors: Yong Seuk Lee
Seung Hoon Lee
O-Sung Lee
Publication date: 01-08-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Issue 8/2018
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Electronic ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-018-2946-5

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Graft sources do not affect to the outcome of transtibial posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2018

Modified Robert Jones bandage can not reduce invisible blood loss after total knee arthroplasty: a randomized-controlled trial

Fixation of medial malleolar fractures with magnesium bioabsorbable headless compression screws: short-term clinical and radiological outcomes in eleven patients

Biomechanical properties of suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: double knotless screw fixation is superior to single knotless screw fixation

Clinical and radiological outcome of Gustilo type III open distal tibial and tibial shaft fractures after staged treatment with posterolateral minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) technique

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Prevalence and clinical characteristics of radiographic central triangular fibrocartilage complex tears in symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals younger than 50 years

Fluid collection bags pose a threat for bacterial contamination in primary total hip arthroplasty: a prospective, internally controlled, non-blinded trial