Can We Afford to Ignore the Biology of Joint Healing and Graft Incorporation After ACL Reconstruction?

Effect of Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis on Anterior Cruciate Ligament Graft Incorporation

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/2325967120960097 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 8 (11) ◽

pp. 232596712096009

Author(s):

Etienne Cavaignac ◽

Timothée Mesnier ◽

Vincent Marot ◽

Andrea Fernandez ◽

Marie Faruch ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Cruciate Ligament ◽

Tibial Tunnel ◽

Tunnel Widening ◽

Graft Healing ◽

Graft Incorporation ◽

The Mean ◽

Anterior Cruciate

Background: It has been shown that adding lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) to standard anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction significantly decreases the loads on the ACL composite graft. To date, the possible effect of LET on ACL graft incorporation is not known. Purpose: To compare the incorporation in tibial bone tunnels of a standard quadrupled semitendinosus (ST4) graft to an ST4 graft plus LET at 1 year postoperatively using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 62 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction were enrolled prospectively: 31 received an ST4 graft, and 31 received an ST4 graft plus LET. Graft incorporation was evaluated with MRI at the 1-year follow-up visit. The following parameters were evaluated: signal-to-noise quotient (SNQ), tibial tunnel widening, graft healing, and graft maturity according to the Howell scale. The primary endpoint was the SNQ of the ST4 graft at 1 year postoperatively; this parameter was adjusted because of unequal baseline characteristics between groups. Clinical and functional outcomes as well as incorporation of the graft were analyzed as secondary endpoints. Results: The mean adjusted SNQ was 0.5 ± 2.1 (95% CI, 0.4-4.6) in the ST4 + LET group and 5.9 ± 3.7 (95% CI, 4.7-7.0) in the ST4 group ( P = .0297). The mean tibial tunnel widening was 73.7% ± 42.2% in the ST4 + LET group versus 77.5% ± 46.7% in the ST4 group ( P = .5685). Howell grade I, indicative of better graft maturity, was statistically more frequent in the ST4 + LET group ( P = .0379). No statistically significant difference was seen between groups in terms of graft healing ( P = .1663). The Lysholm score was statistically higher in the ST4 + LET group ( P = .0058). No significant differences were found between groups in terms of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score ( P = .2683) or Tegner score ( P = .7428). The mean SNQ of the LET graft at the 1-year follow-up visit was 2.6 ± 4.9. Conclusion: At 1 year postoperatively, the MRI appearance of ACL grafts showed generally better incorporation and maturation when combined with LET.

Download Full-text

Hamstring Graft Incorporation According to the Length of the Graft Inside Tunnels

The American Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/0363546517733472 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 46 (2) ◽

pp. 348-356 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Etienne Cavaignac ◽

Vincent Marot ◽

Marie Faruch ◽

Nicolas Reina ◽

Jérôme Murgier ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Bone Graft ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Signal Intensity ◽

Tibial Tunnel ◽

Fixation Method ◽

Graft Incorporation ◽

The Mean ◽

Graft Interface ◽

Bone Tunnels

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with a quadrupled semitendinosus (ST4) graft is an evolution of the standard technique with 2 hamstring tendons (semitendinosus + gracilis [STG]). However, there is no published comparison of how well these 2 types of hamstring grafts are incorporated into the bone tunnels. Because the ST4 graft is shorter, there is less graft material inside the tunnels. Purpose: To use magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to compare graft incorporation in the tibial bone tunnels 1 year after ACL reconstruction with either an STG graft or ST4 graft. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Sixty-two patients who underwent ACL reconstruction were enrolled prospectively: 31 with an ST4 graft and 31 with an STG graft. The same surgical technique, fixation method, and postoperative protocol were used in both groups. Graft incorporation and ligamentization were evaluated with MRI after 1 year of follow-up. The following parameters were evaluated: signal-to-noise quotient (SNQ), tibial tunnel enlargement, signal intensity at the bone-graft interface, and graft signal according to the Howell scale. The number of participants needed to show that the mean SNQ did not differ between the 2 techniques was 31 in each group (with a 1-sided alpha of 2.5% and a 1-sided beta of 10.0%). The Student t test was used to compare the distribution of continuous secondary endpoints. Results: The mean SNQ was 5.2 ± 4.5 for the STG group and 5.9 ± 3.7 for the ST4 group ( P = .5100). The mean tibial tunnel widening was 93.7% ± 51.7% for the STG group versus 80.0% ± 42.9% for the ST4 group ( P = .2605). The groups did not differ in signal intensity at the bone-graft interface ( P = .7502) or in graft signal according to the Howell scale ( P = .4544). Conclusion: At the 1-year postoperative follow-up, incorporation and ligamentization of the STG and ST4 grafts were the same based on MRI analysis. The results were at least as good with the ST4 technique as with the standard STG technique in terms of incorporation and ligamentization.

Download Full-text

Is Remnant Preservation Truly Beneficial to Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Healing? Clinical and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Evaluations of Remnant-Preserved Reconstruction

The American Journal of Sports Medicine ◽

10.1177/0363546516682241 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 45 (5) ◽

pp. 1049-1058 ◽

Cited By ~ 12

Author(s):

Takuya Naraoka ◽

Yuka Kimura ◽

Eiichi Tsuda ◽

Yuji Yamamoto ◽

Yasuyuki Ishibashi

Keyword(s):

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Cruciate Ligament ◽

Acl Injury ◽

Anterior Tibial Translation ◽

Resonance Imaging ◽

Graft Incorporation ◽

Remnant Preservation ◽

Anterior Tibial ◽

Anterior Cruciate ◽

Tibial Translation

Background: Remnant-preserved anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction was introduced to improve clinical outcomes and biological healing. However, the effects of remnant preservation and the influence of the delay from injury until reconstruction on the outcomes of this technique are still uncertain. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purposes of this study were to evaluate whether remnant preservation improved the clinical outcomes and graft incorporation of ACL reconstruction and to examine the influence of the delay between ACL injury and reconstruction on the usefulness of remnant preservation. We hypothesized that remnant preservation improves clinical results and accelerates graft incorporation and that its effect is dependent on the delay between ACL injury and reconstruction. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: A total of 151 consecutive patients who underwent double-bundle ACL reconstruction using a semitendinosus graft were enrolled in this study: 74 knees underwent ACL reconstruction without a remnant (or the remnant was <25% of the intra-articular portion of the graft; NR group), while 77 knees underwent ACL reconstruction with remnant preservation (RP group). These were divided into 4 subgroups based on the time from injury to surgery: phase 1 was <3 weeks (n = 24), phase 2 was 3 to less than 8 weeks (n = 70), phase 3 was 8 to 20 weeks (n = 32), and phase 4 was >20 weeks (n = 25). Clinical measurements, including KT-1000 arthrometer side-to-side anterior tibial translation measurements, were assessed at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after reconstruction. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluations of graft maturation and graft-tunnel integration of the anteromedial and posterolateral bundles were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months after reconstruction. Results: There was no difference in side-to-side anterior tibial translation between the NR and RP groups. There was also no difference in graft maturation between the 2 groups. Furthermore, the time from ACL injury until reconstruction did not affect graft maturation, except in the case of very long delays before reconstruction (phase 4). Graft-tunnel integration was significantly increased in both groups in a time-dependent manner. However, there was no difference between the NR and RP groups. Conclusion: Remnant preservation did not improve knee stability at 2 years after ACL reconstruction. Furthermore, remnant preservation did not accelerate graft incorporation, especially during the acute and subacute injury phases.

Download Full-text