Biomechanical Considerations for Graft Choice in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Overview

Journal Ann Jt

Publisher AME Publishing Company

Date 2024 Mar 26

PMID 38529237

Authors

Mark T Banovetz

Nicholas I Kennedy

Robert F LaPrade

Lars Engebretsen

Gilbert Moatshe

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Injury to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) of the knee is common and often requires surgical reconstruction. There are numerous graft options available to the operating surgeon, to each of which a growing body of dedicated literature exists. Each of these potential choices of ACL graft specimen has a distinctive set of biomechanical properties, clinical outcome profiles, and other special considerations (e.g., autograft versus allograft, harvest site factors, and operating time). The purpose of this review is to discuss the biomechanical characteristics of the native ACL alongside those of several of the most commonly used ACL graft specimens based on a current review of the biomechanical literature. In doing so, this review will also briefly discuss the biomechanical implications for allograft versus autograft usage and single-bundle versus double-bundle repair techniques. This review lists and discusses the stress, strain, stiffness, Young's modulus, and ultimate load to failure of the native ACL, several common autografts [patellar bone-tendon-bone (BTB), hamstring tendon (HT), and quadriceps tendon (QT)], and several common allografts. Given the important biomechanical role of the ACL in stabilizing the knee to translational and rotational forces, it is crucial that the operating surgeon make a decision on graft choice that is informed in the biomechanical implications of ACL graft selection.

Citing Articles

Smaller Width Quadriceps Tendon Grafts Maintain Advantageous Biomechanical Properties for ACL Reconstruction.

Lee R, Voinier S, McCarthy C, Colantonio D, Gee S, Tucker C Orthop J Sports Med. 2025; 13(2):23259671251318014.

PMID: 39968412 PMC: 11833892. DOI: 10.1177/23259671251318014.

Graft Selection in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Comprehensive Review of Current Trends.

Ostojic M, Indelli P, Lovrekovic B, Volcarenghi J, Juric D, Hakam H Medicina (Kaunas). 2025; 60(12.

PMID: 39768969 PMC: 11678177. DOI: 10.3390/medicina60122090.

Quadriceps tendon autograft is promising with lower graft rupture rates and better functional Lysholm scores than hamstring tendon autograft in pediatric ACL reconstruction. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Rangasamy K, Baburaj V, Gopinathan N, Dhillon M, Parikh S J Orthop. 2024; 49:156-166.

PMID: 38223427 PMC: 10787221. DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2023.12.014.

References

Baawa-Ameyaw J, Plastow R, Begum F, Kayani B, Jeddy H, Haddad F . Current concepts in graft selection for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. EFORT Open Rev. 2021; 6(9):808-815. PMC: 8489469. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210023. View

Kanakamedala A, de Sa D, Obioha O, Arakgi M, Schmidt P, Lesniak B . No difference between full thickness and partial thickness quadriceps tendon autografts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018; 27(1):105-116. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-018-5042-z. View

Crum R, Kay J, Lesniak B, Getgood A, Musahl V, de Sa D . Bone Versus All Soft Tissue Quadriceps Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review. Arthroscopy. 2020; 37(3):1040-1052. PMC: 9004211. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.10.018. View

Duthon V, Barea C, Abrassart S, Fasel J, Fritschy D, Menetrey J . Anatomy of the anterior cruciate ligament. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2005; 14(3):204-13. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-005-0679-9. View

Siegel L, Vandenakker-Albanese C, Siegel D . Anterior cruciate ligament injuries: anatomy, physiology, biomechanics, and management. Clin J Sport Med. 2012; 22(4):349-55. DOI: 10.1097/JSM.0b013e3182580cd0. View

Magnussen R, Lawrence J, West R, Toth A, Taylor D, Garrett W . Graft size and patient age are predictors of early revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft. Arthroscopy. 2012; 28(4):526-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2011.11.024. View

Woo S, Hollis J, Adams D, Lyon R, Takai S . Tensile properties of the human femur-anterior cruciate ligament-tibia complex. The effects of specimen age and orientation. Am J Sports Med. 1991; 19(3):217-25. DOI: 10.1177/036354659101900303. View

Hagemans F, van Overvest K, Zijl J, Meuffels D . Four-strand hamstring graft is stiffer than a tripled semitendinosus graft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cadaveric study. J Exp Orthop. 2020; 7(1):37. PMC: 7253562. DOI: 10.1186/s40634-020-00254-6. View

Kraeutler M, Wolsky R, Vidal A, Bravman J . Anatomy and Biomechanics of the Native and Reconstructed Anterior Cruciate Ligament: Surgical Implications. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017; 99(5):438-445. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.16.00754. View

10.

Carey J, Dunn W, Dahm D, Zeger S, Spindler K . A systematic review of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autograft compared with allograft. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91(9):2242-50. PMC: 2730860. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.I.00610. View

11.

Chahal J, Lee A, Heard W, Bach Jr B . A Retrospective Review of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Patellar Tendon: 25 Years of Experience. Orthop J Sports Med. 2015; 1(3):2325967113501789. PMC: 4555486. DOI: 10.1177/2325967113501789. View

12.

Yagi M, Wong E, Kanamori A, Debski R, Fu F, Woo S . Biomechanical analysis of an anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2002; 30(5):660-6. DOI: 10.1177/03635465020300050501. View

13.

Wilson T, Zafuta M, Zobitz M . A biomechanical analysis of matched bone-patellar tendon-bone and double-looped semitendinosus and gracilis tendon grafts. Am J Sports Med. 1999; 27(2):202-7. DOI: 10.1177/03635465990270021501. View

14.

Almqvist K, Jan H, Vercruysse C, Verbeeck R, Verdonk R . The tibialis tendon as a valuable anterior cruciate ligament allograft substitute: biomechanical properties. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2007; 15(11):1326-30. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-007-0396-7. View

15.

Shani R, Umpierez E, Nasert M, Hiza E, Xerogeanes J . Biomechanical Comparison of Quadriceps and Patellar Tendon Grafts in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2015; 32(1):71-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.06.051. View

16.

Boniello M, Schwingler P, Bonner J, Robinson S, Cotter A, Bonner K . Impact of Hamstring Graft Diameter on Tendon Strength: A Biomechanical Study. Arthroscopy. 2015; 31(6):1084-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2014.12.023. View

17.

Bernhardson A, Aman Z, Dornan G, Kemler B, Storaci H, Brady A . Tibial Slope and Its Effect on Force in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Grafts: Anterior Cruciate Ligament Force Increases Linearly as Posterior Tibial Slope Increases. Am J Sports Med. 2019; 47(2):296-302. DOI: 10.1177/0363546518820302. View

18.

Franciozi C, Albertoni L, Gracitelli G, Rezende F, Ambra L, Ferreira F . Anatomic Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction With Autografts. Arthrosc Tech. 2018; 7(2):e89-e95. PMC: 5869793. DOI: 10.1016/j.eats.2017.08.053. View

19.

Offerhaus C, Albers M, Nagai K, Arner J, Hoher J, Musahl V . Individualized Anterior Cruciate Ligament Graft Matching: In Vivo Comparison of Cross-sectional Areas of Hamstring, Patellar, and Quadriceps Tendon Grafts and ACL Insertion Area. Am J Sports Med. 2018; 46(11):2646-2652. DOI: 10.1177/0363546518786032. View

20.

Hamner D, Brown Jr C, Steiner M, Hecker A, Hayes W . Hamstring tendon grafts for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: biomechanical evaluation of the use of multiple strands and tensioning techniques. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999; 81(4):549-57. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199904000-00013. View