Cargando…
Failure Rates of 5-Strand and 6-Strand vs Quadrupled Hamstring Autograft ACL Reconstruction: A Comparative Study of 413 Patients With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up
BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with hamstring autograft has gained popularity. However, an unpredictably small graft diameter has been a drawback of this technique. Smaller graft diameter has been associated with increased risk of revision, and increasing the number of...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7453462/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32923507 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967120946326 |
_version_ | 1783575359859458048 |
---|---|
author | Attia, Ahmed Khalil Nasef, Hazem ElSweify, Kareem Hussein Adam, Mohammed A. AbuShaaban, Faris Arun, Kariyal |
author_facet | Attia, Ahmed Khalil Nasef, Hazem ElSweify, Kareem Hussein Adam, Mohammed A. AbuShaaban, Faris Arun, Kariyal |
author_sort | Attia, Ahmed Khalil |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with hamstring autograft has gained popularity. However, an unpredictably small graft diameter has been a drawback of this technique. Smaller graft diameter has been associated with increased risk of revision, and increasing the number of strands has been reported as a successful technique to increase the graft diameter. PURPOSE: To compare failure rates of 5-strand (5HS) and 6-strand (6HS) hamstring autograft compared with conventional 4-strand (4HS) hamstring autograft. We describe the technique in detail, supplemented by photographs and illustrations, to provide a reproducible technique to avoid the variable and often insufficient 4HS graft diameter reported in the literature. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data of all primary hamstring autograft ACLRs performed at our institution with a minimum 2-year follow-up and 8.0-mm graft diameter. A total of 413 consecutive knees met the study inclusion and exclusion criteria. The study population was divided into 5HS and 6HS groups as well as a 4HS control group. The primary outcome was failure of ACLR, defined as persistent or recurrent instability and/or revision ACLR. RESULTS: The analysis included 224, 156, and 33 knees in the 5HS, 6HS, and 4HS groups, respectively. The overall ACLR failure rate in this study was 11 cases (8%): 5 cases for 5HS, 3 cases for 6HS, and 3 cases for 4HS. No statistically significant differences were found among groups (P = .06). The mean graft diameter was 9 mm, and the mean follow-up was 44.27 months. CONCLUSION: The 5HS and 6HS constructs have similar failure rates to the conventional 4HS construct of 8.0-mm diameter and are therefore safe and reliable to increase the diameter of relatively smaller hamstring autografts. We strongly recommend using this technique when the length of the tendons permits to avoid failures reportedly associated with inadequate graft size. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7453462 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74534622020-09-11 Failure Rates of 5-Strand and 6-Strand vs Quadrupled Hamstring Autograft ACL Reconstruction: A Comparative Study of 413 Patients With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up Attia, Ahmed Khalil Nasef, Hazem ElSweify, Kareem Hussein Adam, Mohammed A. AbuShaaban, Faris Arun, Kariyal Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with hamstring autograft has gained popularity. However, an unpredictably small graft diameter has been a drawback of this technique. Smaller graft diameter has been associated with increased risk of revision, and increasing the number of strands has been reported as a successful technique to increase the graft diameter. PURPOSE: To compare failure rates of 5-strand (5HS) and 6-strand (6HS) hamstring autograft compared with conventional 4-strand (4HS) hamstring autograft. We describe the technique in detail, supplemented by photographs and illustrations, to provide a reproducible technique to avoid the variable and often insufficient 4HS graft diameter reported in the literature. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data of all primary hamstring autograft ACLRs performed at our institution with a minimum 2-year follow-up and 8.0-mm graft diameter. A total of 413 consecutive knees met the study inclusion and exclusion criteria. The study population was divided into 5HS and 6HS groups as well as a 4HS control group. The primary outcome was failure of ACLR, defined as persistent or recurrent instability and/or revision ACLR. RESULTS: The analysis included 224, 156, and 33 knees in the 5HS, 6HS, and 4HS groups, respectively. The overall ACLR failure rate in this study was 11 cases (8%): 5 cases for 5HS, 3 cases for 6HS, and 3 cases for 4HS. No statistically significant differences were found among groups (P = .06). The mean graft diameter was 9 mm, and the mean follow-up was 44.27 months. CONCLUSION: The 5HS and 6HS constructs have similar failure rates to the conventional 4HS construct of 8.0-mm diameter and are therefore safe and reliable to increase the diameter of relatively smaller hamstring autografts. We strongly recommend using this technique when the length of the tendons permits to avoid failures reportedly associated with inadequate graft size. SAGE Publications 2020-08-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7453462/ /pubmed/32923507 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967120946326 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 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 pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Article Attia, Ahmed Khalil Nasef, Hazem ElSweify, Kareem Hussein Adam, Mohammed A. AbuShaaban, Faris Arun, Kariyal Failure Rates of 5-Strand and 6-Strand vs Quadrupled Hamstring Autograft ACL Reconstruction: A Comparative Study of 413 Patients With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up |
title | Failure Rates of 5-Strand and 6-Strand vs Quadrupled Hamstring Autograft ACL Reconstruction: A Comparative Study of 413 Patients With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up |
title_full | Failure Rates of 5-Strand and 6-Strand vs Quadrupled Hamstring Autograft ACL Reconstruction: A Comparative Study of 413 Patients With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up |
title_fullStr | Failure Rates of 5-Strand and 6-Strand vs Quadrupled Hamstring Autograft ACL Reconstruction: A Comparative Study of 413 Patients With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up |
title_full_unstemmed | Failure Rates of 5-Strand and 6-Strand vs Quadrupled Hamstring Autograft ACL Reconstruction: A Comparative Study of 413 Patients With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up |
title_short | Failure Rates of 5-Strand and 6-Strand vs Quadrupled Hamstring Autograft ACL Reconstruction: A Comparative Study of 413 Patients With a Minimum 2-Year Follow-up |
title_sort | failure rates of 5-strand and 6-strand vs quadrupled hamstring autograft acl reconstruction: a comparative study of 413 patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7453462/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32923507 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967120946326 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT attiaahmedkhalil failureratesof5strandand6strandvsquadrupledhamstringautograftaclreconstructionacomparativestudyof413patientswithaminimum2yearfollowup AT nasefhazem failureratesof5strandand6strandvsquadrupledhamstringautograftaclreconstructionacomparativestudyof413patientswithaminimum2yearfollowup AT elsweifykareemhussein failureratesof5strandand6strandvsquadrupledhamstringautograftaclreconstructionacomparativestudyof413patientswithaminimum2yearfollowup AT adammohammeda failureratesof5strandand6strandvsquadrupledhamstringautograftaclreconstructionacomparativestudyof413patientswithaminimum2yearfollowup AT abushaabanfaris failureratesof5strandand6strandvsquadrupledhamstringautograftaclreconstructionacomparativestudyof413patientswithaminimum2yearfollowup AT arunkariyal failureratesof5strandand6strandvsquadrupledhamstringautograftaclreconstructionacomparativestudyof413patientswithaminimum2yearfollowup |