» Articles » PMID: 15911297

Patellar Tendon or Four-strand Hamstring? A Systematic Review of Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Overview
Journal Knee
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2005 May 25
PMID 15911297
Citations 31
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The choice of graft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction remains controversial. A systematic review was performed to compare bone-patella tendon-bone and four-strand hamstring grafts. Medline (1966 onwards), EMBASE (1980 onwards) and the Cochrane database were searched retrieving 6312 possible articles, but only 6 studies fulfilled all the inclusion criteria. To be included, the study had to be prospective, randomised or quasi-randomised, comparing 4SHS and central third BPTB autografts, inserted using an arthroscopically assisted technique and have a minimum 2-year follow-up for all patients. These studies recruited 526 patients, and 475 were followed for at least 2 years with 235 patients receiving a bone-patella tendon-bone graft and 240 receiving a four-strand hamstring graft. Overall, there was a greater chance of extension loss (p=0.007) and a trend towards increased patellofemoral joint pain (p=0.09) with a patella tendon graft. With a four-strand hamstring graft, there is a greater loss of hamstring power (p=0.008) and a trend towards an increased chance of a pivot shift >1 (p=0.12). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of Lachman testing, chance of returning to the same level of sport, clinical knee scores, graft ruptures or other complications.

Citing Articles

Comparison of Dynamic Postural Stability in Autografts Versus Allografts Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Remnant Preservation: A Prospective Study With 1-Year Follow-up.

Rhim H, Lee J, Lee S, Kang C, Han S, Jang K Orthop J Sports Med. 2025; 13(1):23259671241303752.

PMID: 39839982 PMC: 11748150. DOI: 10.1177/23259671241303752.


No difference in stability among various knee flexion angles during fixation of anterolateral ligament reconstruction or lateral extra-articular tenodesis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of biomechanical studies.

Kolin D, Jones R, Heyworth B, Jivanelli B, Fabricant P J Exp Orthop. 2024; 11(3):e12079.

PMID: 39015341 PMC: 11250156. DOI: 10.1002/jeo2.12079.


Comparative Effectiveness of Supervised and Home-Based Rehabilitation after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Competitive Athletes.

Syed R, Hangody L, Frischmann G, Kos P, Kopper B, Berkes I J Clin Med. 2024; 13(8).

PMID: 38673520 PMC: 11051221. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13082245.


Graft Choice for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Women Aged 25 Years and Younger: A Systematic Review.

Etzel C, Nadeem M, Gao B, Boduch A, Owens B Sports Health. 2022; 14(6):829-841.

PMID: 35343326 PMC: 9631041. DOI: 10.1177/19417381221079632.


A Systematic Approach for Stronger Documentation of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Graft Choice.

Arida C, Mastrokalos D, Panagopoulos A, Vlamis J, Triantafyllopoulos I Cureus. 2021; 13(10):e19017.

PMID: 34824933 PMC: 8611317. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.19017.