A Retrospective Review of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Patellar Tendon: 25 Years of Experience

BACKGROUND: The comparative data in the literature regarding rates of reoperation, revision ligament surgery, and contralateral surgery following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are variable and are often derived from studies with multiple surgeons, multiple centers, different surgical techniques, and a wide variety of graft choices. PURPOSE: To describe and analyze a single surgeon’s experience with ACLR using bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) as the primary graft choice over a 25-year period. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: All patients who underwent ACLR from 1986 to 2012 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Traditional follow-up was only for patients who sought subsequent surgery with the index surgeon or presented with contralateral ACL injury. Covariates of interest included age, sex, time, and graft selection. Outcomes of interest included reoperation rates after primary/revision ACLR, rate of revision ACLR, success of meniscal repair with concomitant ACLR, and the proportion of patients undergoing contralateral surgery. RESULTS: A total of 1981 patients (mean age, 29 years; 49% male) were identified. Of patients undergoing primary ACLR (n = 1809), 74% had BPTB autograft and 26% had a central third BPTB allograft. The mean age of patients undergoing autograft and allograft ACLR was 26 and 36 years, respectively (P < .05). Allograft tissue usage increased over time (P < .05). The rate of personal ACLR revision surgery was 1.7% (n = 30) for primary cases and 3.5% (n = 6) for revision cases. There were no significant differences in revision rates between primary autograft (1.6%) and allograft (2.0%) ACLR. With allograft use, the method of sterilization did not affect revision rates. The overall reoperation rate following primary ACLR was 10%; the 5-year reoperation rate was 7.7%. The reoperation rate was lower for primary cases reconstructed with allograft versus autograft (5% vs 12%) (P < .0001). Among primary ACLR cases, 332 patients (18%) underwent concomitant meniscal repair; 14% required revision meniscal surgery. The rate of contralateral ACLR was 6%. CONCLUSION: This information is useful for patients in the informed consent process, for perioperative decision making regarding graft choice, and for identifying patients who are at risk for injuring the uninvolved knee. The observed results in this series also emphasize that allograft ACLR can produce sustainable results with low complication rates in appropriately selected patients.