Metal Interference Screw Fixation Combinations Show High Revision Rates in Primary Hamstring Tendon ACL Reconstruction

Overview

Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Orthopedics
Physiology

Date 2024 Jan 3

PMID 38166808

Authors

Janina Kaarre

Neilen A Benvegnu

Ian D Engler

Ehab M Nazzal

Balint Zsidai

Eric Hamrin Senorski

Volker Musahl

Kristian Samuelsson

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Different fixation methods in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) have been associated with different revision rates, specifically in the early postoperative period. However, most previous research has either grouped together different fixation types or evaluated femoral-sided fixation or tibial-sided fixation separately. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine ACL revision rates for specific combinations of femoral and tibial fixation methods within 2 years of primary hamstring tendon autograft ACLR based on data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry (SNKLR).

Methods: Patients that underwent primary hamstring tendon autograft ACLR between 2005 and 2018 in the SNKLR were included. The collected data included patient characteristics (age, sex, body mass index [BMI]), activity at time of injury, surgical information (concomitant injuries, time from injury to surgery, fixation types at the femur and tibia), and subsequent revision ACLR. Revision rate within 2 years of the index procedure was chosen, as ACLR fixation is most likely to contribute to ACLR revision within the first 2 years, during graft maturation.

Results: Of the 23,238 included patients undergoing primary hamstring ACLR, 581 (2.5%) underwent revision ACLR within 2 years of the index procedure. Among the combinations used for > 300 patients, the femoral metal interference screw/tibial metal interference screw fixation combination had the highest revision rate followed by metal interference screw/resorbable screw and Endobutton/AO screw fixation combinations, with respective revision rates of 4.0, 3.0, and 3.0%. The lowest revision rate within 2 years of ACLR was found in the Endobutton/metal interference screw with backup Osteosuture fixation combination, used in 433 cases, with a failure rate of 0.9%.

Conclusion: Different early ACL revision rates were found across different combinations of femoral and tibial fixation devices within 2 years of primary hamstring tendon autograft ACLR. Metal interference screw fixation, particularly when performed on both the femoral and tibial sides, most frequently resulted in revision ACLR. These findings may be helpful for surgeons in selecting appropriate fixation devices for hamstring ACLR.

Level Of Evidence: IV.

References

Persson A, Kjellsen A, Fjeldsgaard K, Engebretsen L, Espehaug B, Fevang J . Registry data highlight increased revision rates for endobutton/biosure HA in ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendon autograft: a nationwide cohort study from the Norwegian Knee Ligament Registry, 2004-2013. Am J Sports Med. 2015; 43(9):2182-8. DOI: 10.1177/0363546515584757. View

Asif N, Khan M, Haris K, Waliullah S, Sharma A, Firoz D . A prospective randomized study of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with adjustable- versus fixed-loop device for femoral side fixation. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2021; 33(1):42. PMC: 8642980. DOI: 10.1186/s43019-021-00124-0. View

Ishibashi Y, Rudy T, Livesay G, Stone J, Fu F, Woo S . The effect of anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation site at the tibia on knee stability: evaluation using a robotic testing system. Arthroscopy. 1997; 13(2):177-82. DOI: 10.1016/s0749-8063(97)90152-3. View

Rahardja R, Love H, Clatworthy M, Monk A, Young S . Suspensory Versus Interference Tibial Fixation of Hamstring Tendon Autografts in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Results From the New Zealand ACL Registry. Am J Sports Med. 2022; 50(4):904-911. DOI: 10.1177/03635465211070291. View

Svantesson E, Hamrin Senorski E, Baldari A, Ayeni O, Engebretsen L, Franceschi F . Factors associated with additional anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and register comparison: a systematic review on the Scandinavian knee ligament registers. Br J Sports Med. 2018; 53(7):418-425. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098192. View

Brand Jr J, Weiler A, Caborn D, Brown Jr C, Johnson D . Graft fixation in cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2000; 28(5):761-74. DOI: 10.1177/03635465000280052501. View

Eysturoy N, Nissen K, Nielsen T, Lind M . The Influence of Graft Fixation Methods on Revision Rates After Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2018; 46(3):524-530. DOI: 10.1177/0363546517748924. View

Rahr-Wagner L, Thillemann T, Pedersen A, Lind M . Increased risk of revision after anteromedial compared with transtibial drilling of the femoral tunnel during primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Register. Arthroscopy. 2013; 29(1):98-105. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2012.09.009. View

Snaebjornsson T, Hamrin Senorski E, Svantesson E, Westin O, Persson A, Karlsson J . Graft Fixation and Timing of Surgery Are Predictors of Early Anterior Cruciate Ligament Revision: A Cohort Study from the Swedish and Norwegian Knee Ligament Registries Based on 18,425 Patients. JB JS Open Access. 2020; 4(4):e0037. PMC: 6959909. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.19.00037. View

10.

Andernord D, Bjornsson H, Petzold M, Eriksson B, Forssblad M, Karlsson J . Surgical Predictors of Early Revision Surgery After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Results From the Swedish National Knee Ligament Register on 13,102 Patients. Am J Sports Med. 2014; 42(7):1574-82. DOI: 10.1177/0363546514531396. View

11.

Desai N, Andernord D, Sundemo D, Alentorn-Geli E, Musahl V, Fu F . Revision surgery in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cohort study of 17,682 patients from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Register. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016; 25(5):1542-1554. PMC: 5432593. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-016-4399-0. View

12.

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

13.

Kurosaka M, Yoshiya S, Andrish J . A biomechanical comparison of different surgical techniques of graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 1987; 15(3):225-9. DOI: 10.1177/036354658701500306. View

14.

Rothrauff B, Jorge A, de Sa D, Kay J, Fu F, Musahl V . Anatomic ACL reconstruction reduces risk of post-traumatic osteoarthritis: a systematic review with minimum 10-year follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019; 28(4):1072-1084. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-019-05665-2. View

15.

Zantop T, Weimann A, Schmidtko R, Herbort M, Raschke M, Petersen W . Graft laceration and pullout strength of soft-tissue anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: in vitro study comparing titanium, poly-d,l-lactide, and poly-d,l-lactide-tricalcium phosphate screws. Arthroscopy. 2006; 22(11):1204-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2006.06.015. View

16.

Prodromos C, Joyce B, Shi K, Keller B . A meta-analysis of stability after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction as a function of hamstring versus patellar tendon graft and fixation type. Arthroscopy. 2005; 21(10):1202. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2005.08.036. View

17.

Tibor L, Chan P, Funahashi T, Wyatt R, Maletis G, Inacio M . Surgical Technique Trends in Primary ACL Reconstruction from 2007 to 2014. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016; 98(13):1079-89. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.15.00881. View

18.

Chu C, Williams A . Quantitative MRI UTE-T2* and T2* Show Progressive and Continued Graft Maturation Over 2 Years in Human Patients After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Orthop J Sports Med. 2019; 7(8):2325967119863056. PMC: 6693027. DOI: 10.1177/2325967119863056. View

19.

Speziali A, Delcogliano M, Tei M, Placella G, Bartoli M, Menghi A . Fixation techniques for the anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: early follow-up. A systematic review of level I and II therapeutic studies. Musculoskelet Surg. 2014; 98(3):179-87. DOI: 10.1007/s12306-014-0338-8. View

20.

Kvist J, Kartus J, Karlsson J, Forssblad M . Results from the Swedish national anterior cruciate ligament register. Arthroscopy. 2014; 30(7):803-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2014.02.036. View