Cargando…
Revision Rates After Primary Allograft ACL Reconstruction by Allograft Tissue Type in Older Patients
BACKGROUND: While there is extensive literature on the use of allograft versus autograft in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, there is limited clinical evidence to guide the surgeon in choice of allograft tissue type. PURPOSE: To assess the revision rate after primary ACL reconstructi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10508052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37731958 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671231198538 |
_version_ | 1785107447999889408 |
---|---|
author | Engler, Ian D. Chang, Audrey Y. Kaarre, Janina Shannon, Michael F. Curley, Andrew J. Smith, Clair N. Hughes, Jonathan D. Lesniak, Bryson P. Musahl, Volker |
author_facet | Engler, Ian D. Chang, Audrey Y. Kaarre, Janina Shannon, Michael F. Curley, Andrew J. Smith, Clair N. Hughes, Jonathan D. Lesniak, Bryson P. Musahl, Volker |
author_sort | Engler, Ian D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: While there is extensive literature on the use of allograft versus autograft in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, there is limited clinical evidence to guide the surgeon in choice of allograft tissue type. PURPOSE: To assess the revision rate after primary ACL reconstruction with allograft and to compare revision rates based on allograft tissue type and characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary allograft ACL reconstructions at a single academic institution between 2015 and 2019 and who had minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Exclusion criteria were missing surgical or allograft tissue type data. Demographics, operative details, and subsequent surgical procedures were collected. Allograft details included graft tissue type (Achilles, bone–patellar tendon–bone [BTB], tibialis anterior or posterior, semitendinosus, unspecified soft tissue), allograft category (all–soft tissue vs bone block), donor age, irradiation duration and intensity, and chemical cleansing process. Revision rates were calculated and compared by allograft characteristics. RESULTS: Included were 418 patients (age, 39 ± 12 years; body mass index, 30 ± 9 kg/m(2)). The revision rate was 3% (11/418) at a mean follow-up of 4.9 ± 1.4 years. There were no differences in revision rate according to allograft tissue type across Achilles tendon (3%; 3/95), BTB (5%; 3/58), tibialis anterior or posterior (3%; 5/162), semitendinosus (0%; 0/46), or unspecified soft tissue (0%; 0/57) (P = .35). There was no difference in revision rate between all–soft tissue versus bone block allograft (6/283 [2%] vs 5/135 [4%], respectively; P = .34). Of the 51% of grafts with irradiation data, all grafts were irradiated, with levels varying from 1.5 to 2.7 Mrad and 82% of grafts having levels of <2.0 Mrad. There was no difference in revision rate between the low-dose and medium-to high-dose irradiation cohorts (4% vs 6%, respectively; P = .64). CONCLUSION: Similarly low (0%-6%) revision rates after primary ACL reconstruction were seen regardless of allograft tissue type, bone block versus all-soft tissue allograft, and sterilization technique in 418 patients with mean age of 39 years. Surgeons may consider appropriately processed allograft tissue with or without bone block when indicating ACL reconstruction in older patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10508052 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105080522023-09-20 Revision Rates After Primary Allograft ACL Reconstruction by Allograft Tissue Type in Older Patients Engler, Ian D. Chang, Audrey Y. Kaarre, Janina Shannon, Michael F. Curley, Andrew J. Smith, Clair N. Hughes, Jonathan D. Lesniak, Bryson P. Musahl, Volker Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: While there is extensive literature on the use of allograft versus autograft in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, there is limited clinical evidence to guide the surgeon in choice of allograft tissue type. PURPOSE: To assess the revision rate after primary ACL reconstruction with allograft and to compare revision rates based on allograft tissue type and characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary allograft ACL reconstructions at a single academic institution between 2015 and 2019 and who had minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Exclusion criteria were missing surgical or allograft tissue type data. Demographics, operative details, and subsequent surgical procedures were collected. Allograft details included graft tissue type (Achilles, bone–patellar tendon–bone [BTB], tibialis anterior or posterior, semitendinosus, unspecified soft tissue), allograft category (all–soft tissue vs bone block), donor age, irradiation duration and intensity, and chemical cleansing process. Revision rates were calculated and compared by allograft characteristics. RESULTS: Included were 418 patients (age, 39 ± 12 years; body mass index, 30 ± 9 kg/m(2)). The revision rate was 3% (11/418) at a mean follow-up of 4.9 ± 1.4 years. There were no differences in revision rate according to allograft tissue type across Achilles tendon (3%; 3/95), BTB (5%; 3/58), tibialis anterior or posterior (3%; 5/162), semitendinosus (0%; 0/46), or unspecified soft tissue (0%; 0/57) (P = .35). There was no difference in revision rate between all–soft tissue versus bone block allograft (6/283 [2%] vs 5/135 [4%], respectively; P = .34). Of the 51% of grafts with irradiation data, all grafts were irradiated, with levels varying from 1.5 to 2.7 Mrad and 82% of grafts having levels of <2.0 Mrad. There was no difference in revision rate between the low-dose and medium-to high-dose irradiation cohorts (4% vs 6%, respectively; P = .64). CONCLUSION: Similarly low (0%-6%) revision rates after primary ACL reconstruction were seen regardless of allograft tissue type, bone block versus all-soft tissue allograft, and sterilization technique in 418 patients with mean age of 39 years. Surgeons may consider appropriately processed allograft tissue with or without bone block when indicating ACL reconstruction in older patients. SAGE Publications 2023-09-18 /pmc/articles/PMC10508052/ /pubmed/37731958 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671231198538 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Article Engler, Ian D. Chang, Audrey Y. Kaarre, Janina Shannon, Michael F. Curley, Andrew J. Smith, Clair N. Hughes, Jonathan D. Lesniak, Bryson P. Musahl, Volker Revision Rates After Primary Allograft ACL Reconstruction by Allograft Tissue Type in Older Patients |
title | Revision Rates After Primary Allograft ACL Reconstruction by Allograft Tissue Type in Older Patients |
title_full | Revision Rates After Primary Allograft ACL Reconstruction by Allograft Tissue Type in Older Patients |
title_fullStr | Revision Rates After Primary Allograft ACL Reconstruction by Allograft Tissue Type in Older Patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Revision Rates After Primary Allograft ACL Reconstruction by Allograft Tissue Type in Older Patients |
title_short | Revision Rates After Primary Allograft ACL Reconstruction by Allograft Tissue Type in Older Patients |
title_sort | revision rates after primary allograft acl reconstruction by allograft tissue type in older patients |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10508052/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37731958 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671231198538 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT engleriand revisionratesafterprimaryallograftaclreconstructionbyallografttissuetypeinolderpatients AT changaudreyy revisionratesafterprimaryallograftaclreconstructionbyallografttissuetypeinolderpatients AT kaarrejanina revisionratesafterprimaryallograftaclreconstructionbyallografttissuetypeinolderpatients AT shannonmichaelf revisionratesafterprimaryallograftaclreconstructionbyallografttissuetypeinolderpatients AT curleyandrewj revisionratesafterprimaryallograftaclreconstructionbyallografttissuetypeinolderpatients AT smithclairn revisionratesafterprimaryallograftaclreconstructionbyallografttissuetypeinolderpatients AT hughesjonathand revisionratesafterprimaryallograftaclreconstructionbyallografttissuetypeinolderpatients AT lesniakbrysonp revisionratesafterprimaryallograftaclreconstructionbyallografttissuetypeinolderpatients AT musahlvolker revisionratesafterprimaryallograftaclreconstructionbyallografttissuetypeinolderpatients |