Outcome of Patellar Tendon Versus 4-Strand Hamstring Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Randomized Trials
Purpose To compare clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and investigate whether the clinical results of 4-strand hamstring tendon (HT) reconstruction are still inferior to that of the patellar tendon (PT). Methods We performed a comprehensive systematic review and met...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Arthroscopy 2017-02, Vol.33 (2), p.450-463 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 463 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 450 |
container_title | Arthroscopy |
container_volume | 33 |
creator | Chee, Michael Y.K., M.B.B.S Chen, Yongsheng, M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S.I., M.Med.(Orth) Pearce, Christopher Jon, M.B.ChB., M.R.C.S., F.R.C.S.(Tr&Orth) Murphy, Diarmuid P., M.B., B.Ch., BaO(NUI), F.R.C.S.I., F.R.C.S.(Trauma & Orth) Krishna, Lingaraj, M.B.B.S., M.Med.(Orth), M.R.C.S.Ed., F.R.C.S.Ed.(Orth) Hui, James H.P., M.B.B.S., M.D., F.R.C.S.(Orth) Wang, Wilson E.J., M.B.B.S., F.R.C.S., D.Phil Tai, Bee Choo, B.A., M.Sc., Ph.D Salunke, Abhijeet A., M.B.B.S., M.S.(Orth) Chen, Xi, M.D Chua, Zackary K.H., M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S., M.Med.(Orth) Satkunanantham, Kandiah, M.B.B.S., M.Med., F.R.C.S., F.A.M.S |
description | Purpose To compare clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and investigate whether the clinical results of 4-strand hamstring tendon (HT) reconstruction are still inferior to that of the patellar tendon (PT). Methods We performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the English literature on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane register for papers that compared clinical outcomes of PT versus HT for ACL reconstruction. Outcome measures analyzed included rate of rerupture, KT-1000, International Knee Documentation Committee grade, Lachman, pivot shift, Lysholm score, Tegner Activity Scale, anterior knee pain, and discomfort on kneeling. Results We included 19 studies from an initial 1,168 abstracts for the systematic review, and, eventually, 19 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The study population consisted of a total of 1784 patients. The average follow-up duration was 58.8 months. We found significant differences in favor of the HT technique in the domains of anterior knee pain, kneeling pain, and restriction in the range of active extension (“extension deficit”). We found no differences between the PT and HT technique in terms of rerupture rate. There were no clinically significant differences for the outcomes of Lysholm score and Tegner Activity Scale as well as the KT-1000 side-to-side at maximum manual force. Conclusions Contemporary 4-strand HT ACL reconstruction is comparable with the PT technique in terms of clinical stability and postoperative functional status across most parameters studied. The HT technique carries lower risk of postoperative complications such as anterior knee pain, kneeling discomfort, and extension deficit. Primary ACL reconstruction using the 4-strand HT technique achieves clinical results that are comparable with the PT technique with significantly less postoperative complications. Level of Evidence Level I, systemic review and meta-analysis of Level I studies. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.arthro.2016.09.020 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1854801592</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0749806316307757</els_id><sourcerecordid>1854801592</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-c9b53128c2aa9e08550e45acf61d61e3d8fcd2f8ff784a012679e753492f759d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUsuO0zAUjRCI6Qz8AUJesknwI04cFkhVBTNIRYOmha3lca6LS2IX2xlUvo2Pw6EzLNiwutfyOfdxzi2KFwRXBJPm9b5SIX0NvqL5VeGuwhQ_KhaE06ZklJHHxQK3dVcK3LCz4jzGPcaYMcGeFmdU4DrnfFH8up6S9iMgb9AnlWAYVEBbcL136AuEOEVUl5sUlOvRlRpjCtbtHgDLKfldUCZFZHxAS5cg2JyswqRtLobWdqdGcAndgPYukyedrHdv0BJtjjHBqJLV-fPOwg80t_gISZXKqeEYbfwzU_DxAJl1B-gmI_xof0KPtsGqIT4rnpgc4Pl9vCg-v3-3XV2V6-vLD6vlutS1YKnU3S1nhApNleoAC84x1Fxp05C-IcB6YXRPjTCmFbXChDZtBy1ndUdNy7ueXRSvTnUPwX-fICY52qhnrRz4KUoieC0w4R3N0PoE1XnwGMDIQ7CjCkdJsJx9k3t58k3Ovkncyexbpr287zDdjtD_JT0YlQFvTwDIe2a5gozagtPQ25Dlkb23_-vwbwE9WGe1Gr7BEeLeTyHLnneRkUosN_PtzKdDGobblrfsN0zJxBU</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1854801592</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Outcome of Patellar Tendon Versus 4-Strand Hamstring Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Randomized Trials</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Chee, Michael Y.K., M.B.B.S ; Chen, Yongsheng, M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S.I., M.Med.(Orth) ; Pearce, Christopher Jon, M.B.ChB., M.R.C.S., F.R.C.S.(Tr&Orth) ; Murphy, Diarmuid P., M.B., B.Ch., BaO(NUI), F.R.C.S.I., F.R.C.S.(Trauma & Orth) ; Krishna, Lingaraj, M.B.B.S., M.Med.(Orth), M.R.C.S.Ed., F.R.C.S.Ed.(Orth) ; Hui, James H.P., M.B.B.S., M.D., F.R.C.S.(Orth) ; Wang, Wilson E.J., M.B.B.S., F.R.C.S., D.Phil ; Tai, Bee Choo, B.A., M.Sc., Ph.D ; Salunke, Abhijeet A., M.B.B.S., M.S.(Orth) ; Chen, Xi, M.D ; Chua, Zackary K.H., M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S., M.Med.(Orth) ; Satkunanantham, Kandiah, M.B.B.S., M.Med., F.R.C.S., F.A.M.S</creator><creatorcontrib>Chee, Michael Y.K., M.B.B.S ; Chen, Yongsheng, M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S.I., M.Med.(Orth) ; Pearce, Christopher Jon, M.B.ChB., M.R.C.S., F.R.C.S.(Tr&Orth) ; Murphy, Diarmuid P., M.B., B.Ch., BaO(NUI), F.R.C.S.I., F.R.C.S.(Trauma & Orth) ; Krishna, Lingaraj, M.B.B.S., M.Med.(Orth), M.R.C.S.Ed., F.R.C.S.Ed.(Orth) ; Hui, James H.P., M.B.B.S., M.D., F.R.C.S.(Orth) ; Wang, Wilson E.J., M.B.B.S., F.R.C.S., D.Phil ; Tai, Bee Choo, B.A., M.Sc., Ph.D ; Salunke, Abhijeet A., M.B.B.S., M.S.(Orth) ; Chen, Xi, M.D ; Chua, Zackary K.H., M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S., M.Med.(Orth) ; Satkunanantham, Kandiah, M.B.B.S., M.Med., F.R.C.S., F.A.M.S</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose To compare clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and investigate whether the clinical results of 4-strand hamstring tendon (HT) reconstruction are still inferior to that of the patellar tendon (PT). Methods We performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the English literature on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane register for papers that compared clinical outcomes of PT versus HT for ACL reconstruction. Outcome measures analyzed included rate of rerupture, KT-1000, International Knee Documentation Committee grade, Lachman, pivot shift, Lysholm score, Tegner Activity Scale, anterior knee pain, and discomfort on kneeling. Results We included 19 studies from an initial 1,168 abstracts for the systematic review, and, eventually, 19 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The study population consisted of a total of 1784 patients. The average follow-up duration was 58.8 months. We found significant differences in favor of the HT technique in the domains of anterior knee pain, kneeling pain, and restriction in the range of active extension (“extension deficit”). We found no differences between the PT and HT technique in terms of rerupture rate. There were no clinically significant differences for the outcomes of Lysholm score and Tegner Activity Scale as well as the KT-1000 side-to-side at maximum manual force. Conclusions Contemporary 4-strand HT ACL reconstruction is comparable with the PT technique in terms of clinical stability and postoperative functional status across most parameters studied. The HT technique carries lower risk of postoperative complications such as anterior knee pain, kneeling discomfort, and extension deficit. Primary ACL reconstruction using the 4-strand HT technique achieves clinical results that are comparable with the PT technique with significantly less postoperative complications. Level of Evidence Level I, systemic review and meta-analysis of Level I studies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0749-8063</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-3231</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2016.09.020</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28040335</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction - methods ; Autografts ; Hamstring Tendons - transplantation ; Humans ; Orthopedics ; Patellar Ligament - transplantation ; Patient Reported Outcome Measures ; Postoperative Complications ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><ispartof>Arthroscopy, 2017-02, Vol.33 (2), p.450-463</ispartof><rights>Arthroscopy Association of North America</rights><rights>2016 Arthroscopy Association of North America</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-c9b53128c2aa9e08550e45acf61d61e3d8fcd2f8ff784a012679e753492f759d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-c9b53128c2aa9e08550e45acf61d61e3d8fcd2f8ff784a012679e753492f759d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749806316307757$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28040335$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chee, Michael Y.K., M.B.B.S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Yongsheng, M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S.I., M.Med.(Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearce, Christopher Jon, M.B.ChB., M.R.C.S., F.R.C.S.(Tr&Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murphy, Diarmuid P., M.B., B.Ch., BaO(NUI), F.R.C.S.I., F.R.C.S.(Trauma & Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krishna, Lingaraj, M.B.B.S., M.Med.(Orth), M.R.C.S.Ed., F.R.C.S.Ed.(Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hui, James H.P., M.B.B.S., M.D., F.R.C.S.(Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Wilson E.J., M.B.B.S., F.R.C.S., D.Phil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tai, Bee Choo, B.A., M.Sc., Ph.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salunke, Abhijeet A., M.B.B.S., M.S.(Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xi, M.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chua, Zackary K.H., M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S., M.Med.(Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Satkunanantham, Kandiah, M.B.B.S., M.Med., F.R.C.S., F.A.M.S</creatorcontrib><title>Outcome of Patellar Tendon Versus 4-Strand Hamstring Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Randomized Trials</title><title>Arthroscopy</title><addtitle>Arthroscopy</addtitle><description>Purpose To compare clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and investigate whether the clinical results of 4-strand hamstring tendon (HT) reconstruction are still inferior to that of the patellar tendon (PT). Methods We performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the English literature on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane register for papers that compared clinical outcomes of PT versus HT for ACL reconstruction. Outcome measures analyzed included rate of rerupture, KT-1000, International Knee Documentation Committee grade, Lachman, pivot shift, Lysholm score, Tegner Activity Scale, anterior knee pain, and discomfort on kneeling. Results We included 19 studies from an initial 1,168 abstracts for the systematic review, and, eventually, 19 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The study population consisted of a total of 1784 patients. The average follow-up duration was 58.8 months. We found significant differences in favor of the HT technique in the domains of anterior knee pain, kneeling pain, and restriction in the range of active extension (“extension deficit”). We found no differences between the PT and HT technique in terms of rerupture rate. There were no clinically significant differences for the outcomes of Lysholm score and Tegner Activity Scale as well as the KT-1000 side-to-side at maximum manual force. Conclusions Contemporary 4-strand HT ACL reconstruction is comparable with the PT technique in terms of clinical stability and postoperative functional status across most parameters studied. The HT technique carries lower risk of postoperative complications such as anterior knee pain, kneeling discomfort, and extension deficit. Primary ACL reconstruction using the 4-strand HT technique achieves clinical results that are comparable with the PT technique with significantly less postoperative complications. Level of Evidence Level I, systemic review and meta-analysis of Level I studies.</description><subject>Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction - methods</subject><subject>Autografts</subject><subject>Hamstring Tendons - transplantation</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Patellar Ligament - transplantation</subject><subject>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><issn>0749-8063</issn><issn>1526-3231</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUsuO0zAUjRCI6Qz8AUJesknwI04cFkhVBTNIRYOmha3lca6LS2IX2xlUvo2Pw6EzLNiwutfyOfdxzi2KFwRXBJPm9b5SIX0NvqL5VeGuwhQ_KhaE06ZklJHHxQK3dVcK3LCz4jzGPcaYMcGeFmdU4DrnfFH8up6S9iMgb9AnlWAYVEBbcL136AuEOEVUl5sUlOvRlRpjCtbtHgDLKfldUCZFZHxAS5cg2JyswqRtLobWdqdGcAndgPYukyedrHdv0BJtjjHBqJLV-fPOwg80t_gISZXKqeEYbfwzU_DxAJl1B-gmI_xof0KPtsGqIT4rnpgc4Pl9vCg-v3-3XV2V6-vLD6vlutS1YKnU3S1nhApNleoAC84x1Fxp05C-IcB6YXRPjTCmFbXChDZtBy1ndUdNy7ueXRSvTnUPwX-fICY52qhnrRz4KUoieC0w4R3N0PoE1XnwGMDIQ7CjCkdJsJx9k3t58k3Ovkncyexbpr287zDdjtD_JT0YlQFvTwDIe2a5gozagtPQ25Dlkb23_-vwbwE9WGe1Gr7BEeLeTyHLnneRkUosN_PtzKdDGobblrfsN0zJxBU</recordid><startdate>20170201</startdate><enddate>20170201</enddate><creator>Chee, Michael Y.K., M.B.B.S</creator><creator>Chen, Yongsheng, M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S.I., M.Med.(Orth)</creator><creator>Pearce, Christopher Jon, M.B.ChB., M.R.C.S., F.R.C.S.(Tr&Orth)</creator><creator>Murphy, Diarmuid P., M.B., B.Ch., BaO(NUI), F.R.C.S.I., F.R.C.S.(Trauma & Orth)</creator><creator>Krishna, Lingaraj, M.B.B.S., M.Med.(Orth), M.R.C.S.Ed., F.R.C.S.Ed.(Orth)</creator><creator>Hui, James H.P., M.B.B.S., M.D., F.R.C.S.(Orth)</creator><creator>Wang, Wilson E.J., M.B.B.S., F.R.C.S., D.Phil</creator><creator>Tai, Bee Choo, B.A., M.Sc., Ph.D</creator><creator>Salunke, Abhijeet A., M.B.B.S., M.S.(Orth)</creator><creator>Chen, Xi, M.D</creator><creator>Chua, Zackary K.H., M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S., M.Med.(Orth)</creator><creator>Satkunanantham, Kandiah, M.B.B.S., M.Med., F.R.C.S., F.A.M.S</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170201</creationdate><title>Outcome of Patellar Tendon Versus 4-Strand Hamstring Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Randomized Trials</title><author>Chee, Michael Y.K., M.B.B.S ; Chen, Yongsheng, M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S.I., M.Med.(Orth) ; Pearce, Christopher Jon, M.B.ChB., M.R.C.S., F.R.C.S.(Tr&Orth) ; Murphy, Diarmuid P., M.B., B.Ch., BaO(NUI), F.R.C.S.I., F.R.C.S.(Trauma & Orth) ; Krishna, Lingaraj, M.B.B.S., M.Med.(Orth), M.R.C.S.Ed., F.R.C.S.Ed.(Orth) ; Hui, James H.P., M.B.B.S., M.D., F.R.C.S.(Orth) ; Wang, Wilson E.J., M.B.B.S., F.R.C.S., D.Phil ; Tai, Bee Choo, B.A., M.Sc., Ph.D ; Salunke, Abhijeet A., M.B.B.S., M.S.(Orth) ; Chen, Xi, M.D ; Chua, Zackary K.H., M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S., M.Med.(Orth) ; Satkunanantham, Kandiah, M.B.B.S., M.Med., F.R.C.S., F.A.M.S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c483t-c9b53128c2aa9e08550e45acf61d61e3d8fcd2f8ff784a012679e753492f759d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction - methods</topic><topic>Autografts</topic><topic>Hamstring Tendons - transplantation</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Patellar Ligament - transplantation</topic><topic>Patient Reported Outcome Measures</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chee, Michael Y.K., M.B.B.S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Yongsheng, M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S.I., M.Med.(Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pearce, Christopher Jon, M.B.ChB., M.R.C.S., F.R.C.S.(Tr&Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murphy, Diarmuid P., M.B., B.Ch., BaO(NUI), F.R.C.S.I., F.R.C.S.(Trauma & Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Krishna, Lingaraj, M.B.B.S., M.Med.(Orth), M.R.C.S.Ed., F.R.C.S.Ed.(Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hui, James H.P., M.B.B.S., M.D., F.R.C.S.(Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Wilson E.J., M.B.B.S., F.R.C.S., D.Phil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tai, Bee Choo, B.A., M.Sc., Ph.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salunke, Abhijeet A., M.B.B.S., M.S.(Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Xi, M.D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chua, Zackary K.H., M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S., M.Med.(Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Satkunanantham, Kandiah, M.B.B.S., M.Med., F.R.C.S., F.A.M.S</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Arthroscopy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chee, Michael Y.K., M.B.B.S</au><au>Chen, Yongsheng, M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S.I., M.Med.(Orth)</au><au>Pearce, Christopher Jon, M.B.ChB., M.R.C.S., F.R.C.S.(Tr&Orth)</au><au>Murphy, Diarmuid P., M.B., B.Ch., BaO(NUI), F.R.C.S.I., F.R.C.S.(Trauma & Orth)</au><au>Krishna, Lingaraj, M.B.B.S., M.Med.(Orth), M.R.C.S.Ed., F.R.C.S.Ed.(Orth)</au><au>Hui, James H.P., M.B.B.S., M.D., F.R.C.S.(Orth)</au><au>Wang, Wilson E.J., M.B.B.S., F.R.C.S., D.Phil</au><au>Tai, Bee Choo, B.A., M.Sc., Ph.D</au><au>Salunke, Abhijeet A., M.B.B.S., M.S.(Orth)</au><au>Chen, Xi, M.D</au><au>Chua, Zackary K.H., M.B.B.S., M.R.C.S., M.Med.(Orth)</au><au>Satkunanantham, Kandiah, M.B.B.S., M.Med., F.R.C.S., F.A.M.S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Outcome of Patellar Tendon Versus 4-Strand Hamstring Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Randomized Trials</atitle><jtitle>Arthroscopy</jtitle><addtitle>Arthroscopy</addtitle><date>2017-02-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>33</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>450</spage><epage>463</epage><pages>450-463</pages><issn>0749-8063</issn><eissn>1526-3231</eissn><abstract>Purpose To compare clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and investigate whether the clinical results of 4-strand hamstring tendon (HT) reconstruction are still inferior to that of the patellar tendon (PT). Methods We performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the English literature on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane register for papers that compared clinical outcomes of PT versus HT for ACL reconstruction. Outcome measures analyzed included rate of rerupture, KT-1000, International Knee Documentation Committee grade, Lachman, pivot shift, Lysholm score, Tegner Activity Scale, anterior knee pain, and discomfort on kneeling. Results We included 19 studies from an initial 1,168 abstracts for the systematic review, and, eventually, 19 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The study population consisted of a total of 1784 patients. The average follow-up duration was 58.8 months. We found significant differences in favor of the HT technique in the domains of anterior knee pain, kneeling pain, and restriction in the range of active extension (“extension deficit”). We found no differences between the PT and HT technique in terms of rerupture rate. There were no clinically significant differences for the outcomes of Lysholm score and Tegner Activity Scale as well as the KT-1000 side-to-side at maximum manual force. Conclusions Contemporary 4-strand HT ACL reconstruction is comparable with the PT technique in terms of clinical stability and postoperative functional status across most parameters studied. The HT technique carries lower risk of postoperative complications such as anterior knee pain, kneeling discomfort, and extension deficit. Primary ACL reconstruction using the 4-strand HT technique achieves clinical results that are comparable with the PT technique with significantly less postoperative complications. Level of Evidence Level I, systemic review and meta-analysis of Level I studies.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>28040335</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.arthro.2016.09.020</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0749-8063 |
ispartof | Arthroscopy, 2017-02, Vol.33 (2), p.450-463 |
issn | 0749-8063 1526-3231 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1854801592 |
source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction - methods Autografts Hamstring Tendons - transplantation Humans Orthopedics Patellar Ligament - transplantation Patient Reported Outcome Measures Postoperative Complications Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic |
title | Outcome of Patellar Tendon Versus 4-Strand Hamstring Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Randomized Trials |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T20%3A59%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Outcome%20of%20Patellar%20Tendon%20Versus%204-Strand%20Hamstring%20Tendon%20Autografts%20for%20Anterior%20Cruciate%20Ligament%20Reconstruction:%20A%20Systematic%20Review%20and%20Meta-analysis%20of%20Prospective%20Randomized%20Trials&rft.jtitle=Arthroscopy&rft.au=Chee,%20Michael%20Y.K.,%20M.B.B.S&rft.date=2017-02-01&rft.volume=33&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=450&rft.epage=463&rft.pages=450-463&rft.issn=0749-8063&rft.eissn=1526-3231&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.arthro.2016.09.020&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1854801592%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1854801592&rft_id=info:pmid/28040335&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0749806316307757&rfr_iscdi=true |