No Clinical Advantage of Harvesting a Patellar Bone Block Compared With All Soft-Tissue Graft in Primary Quadriceps Tendon Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.
Armin Runer, Amit Meena, Lena Jucho, Guido Wierer, Robert Csapo, Elisabeth Abermann, Mirco Herbort, Christian Hoser, Christian Fink
{"title":"No Clinical Advantage of Harvesting a Patellar Bone Block Compared With All Soft-Tissue Graft in Primary Quadriceps Tendon Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.","authors":"Armin Runer, Amit Meena, Lena Jucho, Guido Wierer, Robert Csapo, Elisabeth Abermann, Mirco Herbort, Christian Hoser, Christian Fink","doi":"10.1016/j.arthro.2024.08.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare patient-reported outcomes measurements and subsequent surgical interventions in patients treated with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using either quadriceps tendon autograft with a patellar bone block (bQT) or soft tissue only (sQT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All ACLRs performed between January 2010 and March 2022 were prospectively followed for 24 months and retrospectively evaluated. All primary ACLRs with full 24 months of follow-up data, without any previous surgery or any additional ligamentous interventions, were matched for major ACL risk factors, including sex, age, Tegner activity level [TAL], pivoting sports, and concomitant injuries. Patient-reported outcomes measurements (Lysholm score, visual analog scale for pain, and TAL) and subsequent surgical interventions were registered after 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Binary logistic regression was used to assess the influence of graft type, age, preinjury TAL, sex, pivoting sports, and concomitant interventions on the need to undergo subsequent surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After matching, 246 patients were included in the final analysis. Both groups did not differ regarding any preoperative patient demographics or intraoperative details. At final follow-up, no significant differences in mean Lysholm score (sQT: 90.8 ± 10.6, bQT: 91.8 ± 10.6, P = .46), median TAL (sQT: 6 [1-10], bQT: 6 [1-10], P = .53), and visual analog scale for pain (sQT: 0.7 ± 1.1, bQT: 0.7 ± 1.2, P = .70) were reported between both groups. A total of 70.3% (sQT-A: 70.7%, bQT: 69.9%, P = .89) of patients returned to or exceeded their preinjury activity level. In terms of revision ACLR, there was no statistically significant difference between bQT (3.3%) and sQT (4.1%). Similarly, no difference was observed in contralateral ACLR (bQT: 7.3% sQT: 11.4%). Regression analysis indicated that none of the studied factors, including the use of a patellar bone block, influenced subsequent surgery, revision ACLR, or contralateral ACLR.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Harvesting an additional patellar bone block in quadriceps tendon ACLR does not seem to affect postoperative patient-reported outcomes, ACL revision, or contralateral ACL reconstruction rates.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III, cohort study.</p>","PeriodicalId":55459,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2024.08.013","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To compare patient-reported outcomes measurements and subsequent surgical interventions in patients treated with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using either quadriceps tendon autograft with a patellar bone block (bQT) or soft tissue only (sQT).
Methods: All ACLRs performed between January 2010 and March 2022 were prospectively followed for 24 months and retrospectively evaluated. All primary ACLRs with full 24 months of follow-up data, without any previous surgery or any additional ligamentous interventions, were matched for major ACL risk factors, including sex, age, Tegner activity level [TAL], pivoting sports, and concomitant injuries. Patient-reported outcomes measurements (Lysholm score, visual analog scale for pain, and TAL) and subsequent surgical interventions were registered after 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Binary logistic regression was used to assess the influence of graft type, age, preinjury TAL, sex, pivoting sports, and concomitant interventions on the need to undergo subsequent surgery.
Results: After matching, 246 patients were included in the final analysis. Both groups did not differ regarding any preoperative patient demographics or intraoperative details. At final follow-up, no significant differences in mean Lysholm score (sQT: 90.8 ± 10.6, bQT: 91.8 ± 10.6, P = .46), median TAL (sQT: 6 [1-10], bQT: 6 [1-10], P = .53), and visual analog scale for pain (sQT: 0.7 ± 1.1, bQT: 0.7 ± 1.2, P = .70) were reported between both groups. A total of 70.3% (sQT-A: 70.7%, bQT: 69.9%, P = .89) of patients returned to or exceeded their preinjury activity level. In terms of revision ACLR, there was no statistically significant difference between bQT (3.3%) and sQT (4.1%). Similarly, no difference was observed in contralateral ACLR (bQT: 7.3% sQT: 11.4%). Regression analysis indicated that none of the studied factors, including the use of a patellar bone block, influenced subsequent surgery, revision ACLR, or contralateral ACLR.
Conclusions: Harvesting an additional patellar bone block in quadriceps tendon ACLR does not seem to affect postoperative patient-reported outcomes, ACL revision, or contralateral ACL reconstruction rates.
期刊介绍:
Nowhere is minimally invasive surgery explained better than in Arthroscopy, the leading peer-reviewed journal in the field. Every issue enables you to put into perspective the usefulness of the various emerging arthroscopic techniques. The advantages and disadvantages of these methods -- along with their applications in various situations -- are discussed in relation to their efficiency, efficacy and cost benefit. As a special incentive, paid subscribers also receive access to the journal expanded website.