Hamstring tendon autograft versus LARS artificial ligament for arthroscopic posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in a long-term follow-up

Introduction Surgical reconstruction has been increasingly recommended for the surgical management of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) ruptures. While the choice of tissue graft still remains controversial. Currently both hamstring tendon autograft (HTG) and ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS) artificial ligament are widely used but there are seldom reports on the comparisons of their clinical results. Our study was aimed to assess the effectiveness of these two grafts. Materials and methods Thirty-five patients with unilateral PCL rupture were enrolled in this retrospectively study. Sixteen of them received arthroscopically assisted PCL reconstruction using hamstring tendon autografts (HTG group) and nineteen using LARS ligaments (LARS group). All cases were followed up for 46–57 months with a mean of 51 months. Follow-up examinations included radiographic assessment, Lysholm score, Tegner score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) rating scales and KT-1000 test. Results All patients improved significantly at the final follow-up compared with the examinational results preoperatively and there were no significant differences between HTG group and LARS group with respect to the results of radiographic assessment, Lysholm score, Tegner score, IKDC rating scales and KT-1000 test. Conclusions Similar good clinical results were obtained after PCL reconstruction using hamstring tendon autografts and LARS ligaments. Both LARS ligament and hamstring tendon autograft are ideal grafts for PCL reconstruction.