Varying Definitions of Return to Sport, Study Quality, and Outcome Measurements Limit Comparison of Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Quadriceps Tendon Autografts to Hamstring and Bone–Patellar Tendon–Bone Autografts: A Systematic Review

IF 5.4 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery Pub Date : 2025-10-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-25 DOI:10.1016/j.arthro.2025.03.036
A. Scott Emmert M.D., Isaac Hale B.S., Logan P. Lake B.S., Paul McMillan M.D., Brian M. Johnson M.D., Sarah C. Kurkowski M.D., Henry A. Kuechly B.S., Brian M. Grawe M.D.
{"title":"Varying Definitions of Return to Sport, Study Quality, and Outcome Measurements Limit Comparison of Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Quadriceps Tendon Autografts to Hamstring and Bone–Patellar Tendon–Bone Autografts: A Systematic Review","authors":"A. Scott Emmert M.D.,&nbsp;Isaac Hale B.S.,&nbsp;Logan P. Lake B.S.,&nbsp;Paul McMillan M.D.,&nbsp;Brian M. Johnson M.D.,&nbsp;Sarah C. Kurkowski M.D.,&nbsp;Henry A. Kuechly B.S.,&nbsp;Brian M. Grawe M.D.","doi":"10.1016/j.arthro.2025.03.036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To systematically review the existing literature on return-to-sport (RTS) outcomes for quadricep tendon (QT) autografts compared to hamstring tendon (HT) and/or bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) autografts for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were queried for studies comparing RTS data for ACLR with QT autografts versus HT and/or BPTB autografts in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria were randomized and nonrandomized prospective or retrospective studies evaluating primary ACLR containing RTS data for QT autograft and at least 1 other graft type. Exclusion criteria included patients &lt;18 years of age, patients undergoing revision ACLR, cadaveric/animal studies, and studies lacking graft outcome data. Included studies were analyzed for methodologic data, RTS data, quality, and risk of bias.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Ten articles (2 randomized controlled trials, 3 prospective studies, and 5 retrospective studies) comprising 1,006 reconstructions with a level of evidence of II to III and average follow-up of 8 to 120 months were included. Nonrandomized studies most frequently possessed a Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies quality rating of “moderate,” while half of the randomized studies had a Risk of Bias 2.0 rating of “some concern of bias.” Four subjective definitions of RTS were identified: (1) return to preinjury activity level based on the Tegner activity scale, (2) return to play, (3) return to level I/II (cutting) sports, and (4) return to preinjury sports. RTS and mean time to RTS rates ranged from 16% to 100% and 8.4 to 11.1 months for QT autografts, 32% to 100% and 8.8 months for HT autografts, and 64% to 85% and 8.1 months for BPTB autografts.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Primary ACLR with QT autografts shows similar overall RTS rates and mean time to RTS as HT and BPTB autografts. However, insufficient quality and quantity of studies investigating RTS outcomes for QT autografts underscore the unreliability of the current literature and need for high-quality, prospective studies.</div></div><div><h3>Level of Evidence</h3><div>Level III, systematic review of Level II and III studies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55459,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","volume":"41 10","pages":"Pages 4335-4345"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749806325002324","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To systematically review the existing literature on return-to-sport (RTS) outcomes for quadricep tendon (QT) autografts compared to hamstring tendon (HT) and/or bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) autografts for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).

Methods

PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were queried for studies comparing RTS data for ACLR with QT autografts versus HT and/or BPTB autografts in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria were randomized and nonrandomized prospective or retrospective studies evaluating primary ACLR containing RTS data for QT autograft and at least 1 other graft type. Exclusion criteria included patients <18 years of age, patients undergoing revision ACLR, cadaveric/animal studies, and studies lacking graft outcome data. Included studies were analyzed for methodologic data, RTS data, quality, and risk of bias.

Results

Ten articles (2 randomized controlled trials, 3 prospective studies, and 5 retrospective studies) comprising 1,006 reconstructions with a level of evidence of II to III and average follow-up of 8 to 120 months were included. Nonrandomized studies most frequently possessed a Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies quality rating of “moderate,” while half of the randomized studies had a Risk of Bias 2.0 rating of “some concern of bias.” Four subjective definitions of RTS were identified: (1) return to preinjury activity level based on the Tegner activity scale, (2) return to play, (3) return to level I/II (cutting) sports, and (4) return to preinjury sports. RTS and mean time to RTS rates ranged from 16% to 100% and 8.4 to 11.1 months for QT autografts, 32% to 100% and 8.8 months for HT autografts, and 64% to 85% and 8.1 months for BPTB autografts.

Conclusions

Primary ACLR with QT autografts shows similar overall RTS rates and mean time to RTS as HT and BPTB autografts. However, insufficient quality and quantity of studies investigating RTS outcomes for QT autografts underscore the unreliability of the current literature and need for high-quality, prospective studies.

Level of Evidence

Level III, systematic review of Level II and III studies.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
恢复运动的不同定义、研究质量和结果测量限制了用股四头肌腱自体移植重建腘绳肌和骨-髌肌腱-骨自体移植重建初交叉韧带的比较:一项系统综述。
目的:系统回顾现有文献,比较QT自体移植与HT和/或BPTB自体移植治疗原发性ACLR的RTS结果。方法:根据PRISMA指南,查询PubMed/Medline、Scopus、Embase和Cochrane数据库,比较ACLR与QT自体移植与HT和/或BPTB自体移植的RTS数据。纳入标准是随机和非随机的前瞻性或回顾性研究,评估包含QT自体移植物和至少一种其他移植物类型RTS数据的原发性ACLR。结果:纳入10篇文章(2篇rct, 3篇前瞻性研究,5篇回顾性研究),包括1006项重构,证据水平为II-III,平均随访时间为8-120个月。非随机研究通常具有“中度”的未成年人质量评级,而一半的随机研究具有“有一定偏差”的2.0风险评级。本文确定了RTS的四种主观定义:(1)根据Tegner活动量表恢复到损伤前的活动水平;(2)回归游戏;(3)回到一级/二级(切割)运动;(4)回归伤前运动。QT自体移植物的RTS和平均RTS时间率为16-100%和8.4-11.1个月,HT自体移植物为32-100%和8.8个月,BPTB自体移植物为64-85%和8.1个月。结论:原发性ACLR自体QT移植与HT和BPTB自体移植的总体RTS率和平均RTS时间相似。然而,调查QT自体移植物RTS结果的研究质量和数量不足,强调了当前文献的不可靠性,需要进行高质量的前瞻性研究。证据等级:III级,II级和III级研究的系统评价。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
17.00%
发文量
555
审稿时长
58 days
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.
期刊最新文献
Iliopsoas Tunnel Deepening and Fractional Lengthening Relieve Painful Internal Snapping During Concomitant Primary Hip Arthroscopy for Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Propensity Matched Comparison. Editorial Commentary: Eight Is Enough For Hamstring Anterior Cruciate Ligament Autograft Reconstruction. Editorial Commentary: Balancing Pain Relief and Function With Iliopsoas Tendon Treatment and Concomitant Hip Arthroscopy for the Internal Snapping Hip. Editorial Commentary: Posterior Visualization in Ramp Repair: The Only Path to True Healing. Editorial Commentary: Fourteen-Year Follow-Up Shows High Overall Incidence of Osteoarthritis With Anatomic Single-Bundle and Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Perform an Anatomic Reconstruction but Also Save the Meniscus!
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1