Comparison of Clinical Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using a Hybrid Graft Versus a Hamstring Autograft

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with a hybrid graft versus an autograft after 3years of follow-up. Among 57 patients with an ACL injury who underwent ACL reconstruction, 28 patients received a hybrid graft (gracilis and semitendinosus tendon autograft plus a soft tissue allograft) and 29 patients received an autograft (gracilis and semitendinosus tendon autograft). The 2 groups were compared after a minimum 3-year follow-up regarding International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) assessment of knee function and stability, pivot-shift test, Lachman test, and KT-1000 side-to-side differences. The patient-reported Tegner activity score, Lysholm score, and subjective IKDC score were also compared. Graft failures were identified by patient-reported outcomes, physical examinations, or magnetic resonance imaging, and were confirmed on second-look arthroscopy; failure rate was compared between groups. At final follow-up, the 2 groups significantly differed in pivot-shift test result (P= .013) and Lachman test result (P= .027). The failure rate tended to be greater in the hybrid graft group (14.3%) than in the autograft group (3.4%) (P= .148). All 5 patients with failed graft reconstruction were revised after second-look arthroscopy. The KT-1000 side-to-side differences at final follow-up were significantly inferior in the hybrid graft group (3.5 ± 2.0) compared with the autograft group (2.5 ± 1.0, P= .024). The hybrid graft group also had a lower mean Lysholm score (P= .000) and subjective IKDC score (P= .006) than the autograft group. The mean Tegner activity score was 6.8 ± 0.8 in the hybrid graft group and 6.9 ± 0.6 in the autograft group (P= .436). The knee stability and patient-reported scores in the autograft-irradiated allograft hybrid graft ACL reconstruction group were significantly inferior compared with those in the autograft ACL reconstruction group. Level III, retrospective comparative study.