Cancellous Allogenic and Autologous Bone Grafting Ensure Comparable Tunnel Filling Results in Two-staged Revision ACL Surgery

Overview

Journal Arch Orthop Trauma Surg

Specialties Emergency Medicine
General Surgery
Orthopedics

Date 2020 Apr 3

PMID 32239328

Citations 6

Authors

Wolf Christian Prall

T Kusmenkov

B Schmidt

J Furmetz

F Haasters

J H Naendrup

W Bocker

S Shafizadeh

H O Mayr

T R Pfeiffer

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objectives: Patients with recurrent instability after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction often present with enlarged or misplaced tunnels and bone grafting is required prior to the actual revision reconstruction. Autologous bone grafting features limited quantity and donor site morbidity. These problems may be eliminated utilizing cancellous bone allografts, but their efficiency and reliability have not been investigated systematically. The aim of the present study was to compare tunnel filling rates attained by utilizing either allogenic or autologous cancellous bone grafts.

Materials And Methods: A total of 103 consecutive patients were enrolled retrospectively. All patients suffered from recurrent instability and underwent either allogenic or autologous cancellous bone grafting. Computed tomography (CT) was carried out before and after the bone grafting procedure. Based on preoperative CT scans, positioning and maximum diameter of the femoral and tibial tunnels were determined. Tunnel filling rates were calculated as a ratio of pre- and postoperative tunnel volumes. Primary outcome was the tibial tunnel filling rate. Femoral filling rates and density of the grafted bone were assessed secondarily.

Results: Preoperative CT scans revealed no significant differences between the two groups regarding distribution of misplacement and widening of the femoral or tibial tunnel. Postoperative CT scans were conducted after an interval of 5.2 months. Tunnel filling rates of 74.5% (± 14.3) femoral and 85.3% (± 10.3) tibial were achieved in the allogenic compared to 74.3% (± 15.9) femoral and 84.9% (± 9.4) tibial in the autologous group. With p values of 0.85 at the femur and 0.83 at the tibia, there were no significant differences between the groups. The density of the grafted bone revealed significantly higher values in the allogenic group.

Conclusions: Utilizing cancellous bone allografts in two-staged revision ACL surgery provides for sufficient and reproducible filling of enlarged or misplaced tunnels. The filling rates are comparable to those achieved with autologous bone grafting. Advantages of allografts are the unrestricted quantity and the absence of any harvesting procedure.

Citing Articles

Satisfactory outcomes after one-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using rectangular tunnel technique.

Okimura S, Suzuki T, Ikeda Y, Shiwaku K, Teramoto A Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023; 31(12):5690-5697.

PMID: 37898566 DOI: 10.1007/s00167-023-07627-1.

Tunnel widening after ACL reconstruction with different fixation techniques: aperture fixation with biodegradable interference screws versus all-inside technique with suspensory cortical buttons. 5-year data from a prospective randomized trial.

Eichinger M, Ploner M, Degenhart G, Rudisch A, Smekal V, Attal R Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023; 143(11):6707-6718.

PMID: 37542556 PMC: 10541822. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-023-05001-x.

Application of 3D Printing in Bone Grafts.

Brachet A, Belzek A, Furtak D, Geworgjan Z, Tulej D, Kulczycka K Cells. 2023; 12(6).

PMID: 36980200 PMC: 10047278. DOI: 10.3390/cells12060859.

Allografts: expanding the surgeon's armamentarium.

Ahmed N, Eras V, Pruss A, Perka C, Brune J, Vu-Han T Cell Tissue Bank. 2022; 24(1):273-283.

PMID: 35763162 PMC: 10006263. DOI: 10.1007/s10561-022-10015-7.

Primary stability of single-stage revision reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament in case of failure of dynamic intraligamentary stabilization depends on implant position during ACL repair.

Glasbrenner J, Fischer M, Raschke M, Briese T, Muller M, Herbst E Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2021; 142(7):1589-1595.

PMID: 34331580 PMC: 9217861. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-021-04088-4.

References

Sanders T, Kremers H, Bryan A, Larson D, Dahm D, Levy B . Incidence of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears and Reconstruction: A 21-Year Population-Based Study. Am J Sports Med. 2016; 44(6):1502-7. DOI: 10.1177/0363546516629944. View

Zbrojkiewicz D, Vertullo C, Grayson J . Increasing rates of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in young Australians, 2000-2015. Med J Aust. 2018; 208(8):354-358. DOI: 10.5694/mja17.00974. View

Buller L, Best M, Baraga M, Kaplan L . Trends in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in the United States. Orthop J Sports Med. 2015; 3(1):2325967114563664. PMC: 4555588. DOI: 10.1177/2325967114563664. View

Mall N, Chalmers P, Moric M, Tanaka M, Cole B, Bach Jr B . Incidence and trends of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the United States. Am J Sports Med. 2014; 42(10):2363-70. DOI: 10.1177/0363546514542796. View

Ulstein S, Aroen A, Engebretsen L, Forssblad M, Lygre S, Rotterud J . Effect of Concomitant Cartilage Lesions on Patient-Reported Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Nationwide Cohort Study From Norway and Sweden of 8470 Patients With 5-Year Follow-up. Orthop J Sports Med. 2018; 6(7):2325967118786219. PMC: 6058423. DOI: 10.1177/2325967118786219. View

Prentice H, Lind M, Mouton C, Persson A, Magnusson H, Gabr A . Patient demographic and surgical characteristics in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a description of registries from six countries. Br J Sports Med. 2018; 52(11):716-722. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098674. View

Wiggins A, Grandhi R, Schneider D, Stanfield D, Webster K, Myer G . Risk of Secondary Injury in Younger Athletes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2016; 44(7):1861-76. PMC: 5501245. DOI: 10.1177/0363546515621554. View

Lefevre N, Klouche S, Mirouse G, Herman S, Gerometta A, Bohu Y . Return to Sport After Primary and Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Prospective Comparative Study of 552 Patients From the FAST Cohort. Am J Sports Med. 2016; 45(1):34-41. DOI: 10.1177/0363546516660075. View

Weiler A, Schmeling A, Stohr I, Kaab M, Wagner M . Primary versus single-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autologous hamstring tendon grafts: a prospective matched-group analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2007; 35(10):1643-52. DOI: 10.1177/0363546507303114. View

10.

Cheatham S, Johnson D . Anticipating problems unique to revision ACL surgery. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2013; 21(2):129-34. DOI: 10.1097/JSA.0b013e3182900739. View

11.

Richter D, Werner B, Miller M . Surgical Pearls in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Surgery: When Must I Stage?. Clin Sports Med. 2016; 36(1):173-187. DOI: 10.1016/j.csm.2016.08.008. View

12.

Zantop T, Petersen W . [Arthroscopic filling of malplaced and enlarged drill tunnels with iliac crest spongiosa in recurrent instability after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction]. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2011; 23(4):337-350. DOI: 10.1007/s00064-011-0029-7. View

13.

Thomas N, Kankate R, Wandless F, Pandit H . Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a 2-stage technique with bone grafting of the tibial tunnel. Am J Sports Med. 2005; 33(11):1701-9. DOI: 10.1177/0363546505276759. View

14.

Franceschi F, Papalia R, Del Buono A, Zampogna B, Diaz Balzani L, Maffulli N . Two-stage procedure in anterior cruciate ligament revision surgery: a five-year follow-up prospective study. Int Orthop. 2013; 37(7):1369-74. PMC: 3685647. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-013-1886-5. View

15.

Uchida R, Toritsuka Y, Mae T, Kusano M, Ohzono K . Healing of tibial bone tunnels after bone grafting for staged revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery: A prospective computed tomography analysis. Knee. 2016; 23(5):830-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2016.04.012. View

16.

Dimitriou R, Mataliotakis G, Angoules A, Kanakaris N, Giannoudis P . Complications following autologous bone graft harvesting from the iliac crest and using the RIA: a systematic review. Injury. 2011; 42 Suppl 2:S3-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.06.015. View

17.

Erickson B, Cvetanovich G, Waliullah K, Khair M, Smith P, Bach Jr B . Two-Stage Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Orthopedics. 2016; 39(3):e456-64. DOI: 10.3928/01477447-20160324-01. View

18.

Prall W, Kusmenkov T, Furmetz J, Haasters F, Mayr H, Bocker W . Outcomes of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction secondary to reamer-irrigator-aspirator harvested bone grafting. Injury. 2018; 50(2):467-475. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2018.12.020. View

19.

Bernard M, Hertel P . [Intraoperative and postoperative insertion control of anterior cruciate ligament-plasty. A radiologic measuring method (quadrant method)]. Unfallchirurg. 1996; 99(5):332-40. View

20.

Sirleo L, Innocenti M, Innocenti M, Civinini R, Carulli C, Matassi F . Post-operative 3D CT feedback improves accuracy and precision in the learning curve of anatomic ACL femoral tunnel placement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017; 26(2):468-477. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-017-4614-7. View