Factors affecting donor-site morbidity after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts

1997 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 222-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Kartus ◽  
Sven Stener ◽  
Sven Lindahl ◽  
Björn Engström ◽  
Bengt I. Eriksson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Bone Patellar Tendon

Patellar Tendon or Semitendinosus Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction?

2003 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Ejerhed ◽  
Jüri Kartus ◽  
Ninni Sernert ◽  
Kristina Köhler ◽  
Jon Karlsson
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Patellar Tendon ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Semitendinosus Tendon ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Bone Patellar Tendon

Background There are well-known problems with the use of bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, especially in terms of donor site morbidity. Hamstring tendon grafts have been increasingly used as an alternative, but there are very few controlled studies comparing the methods. Hypothesis Use of semitendinosus tendon grafts will cause less donor site morbidity and result in better knee-walking ability. Study Design Prospective randomized clinical trial. Methods Seventy-one patients who had a unilateral anterior cruciate ligament rupture underwent arthroscopic reconstruction with interference screw fixation and use of either bone-patellar tendon-bone or semitendinosus tendon graft. Outcome assessment was performed by physiotherapists not involved in the patients' care. Results At the 2-year follow-up, no differences were found in terms of the Lysholm score, Tegner activity level, KT-1000 arthrometer side-to-side laxity measurement, single-legged hop test, or International Knee Documentation Committee classification results. The knee-walking test was rated difficult or impossible to perform by 53% of the bone-patellar tendon-bone group and by only 23% of the semitendinosus graft patients, a significant difference. Conclusions The semitendinosus tendon graft is at least an equivalent option to the bone-patellar tendon-bone graft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, and we recommend its use.

Time-Dependent Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Reducing Donor-Site Pain After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2020 ◽  
pp. 036354652096828
Author(s):  
André Luís Lugnani de Andrade ◽  
Amanda Veiga Sardeli ◽  
Thiago Alves Garcia ◽  
Bruno Livani ◽  
William Dias Belangero
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has a high incidence among sports players, and one important side effect of the surgery is graft donor site morbidity. Although some evidence suggests that application of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) during ACLR reduces pain and improves knee function, it is not a universal finding. Purpose: To perform a meta-analysis of previous studies testing the effects of PRP on donor site morbidity after ACLR. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We reviewed PubMed (Medline), Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases to find studies testing the effects of PRP on the donor site of ACLR autograft. After identifying 4 studies, we conducted 2 meta-analyses, 1 for the effects of PRP on pain, assessed by visual analog scale (VAS), and the other for the functional knee scores. We also tested the ability of time after ACLR to predict the PRP-related reduction of pain. Results: In the 4 studies identified, 157 patients were analyzed. Although the VAS score was lower with PRP at 6 months (raw mean difference [RMD], –0.97 [95% CI, −1.59 to −0.36]; P = .001) and 12 months (RMD, −0.61 [95% CI,−1.02 to −0.21]; P = .003), the effects of PRP disappeared at 24 months (RMD, −0.08 [95% CI,−0.38 to 0.22]; P = .586). A univariate regression analysis reinforced the ability of time after ACLR to predict the PRP-related reduction of VAS pain score ( r2 = 0.98). However, knee function after ACLR was not improved by the use of PRP (standardized mean difference, 0.71 [95% CI,−0.17 to 1.60]; P = .114). Conclusion: PRP applied to a bone–patellar tendon–bone donor site could reduce knee pain within a year, and this reduction had a correlation with time, meaning that the effect of PRP decreased with time after surgery. However, pain reduction did not reach clinical relevance and did not lead to better functional knee scores.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document