Comparison of Clinical Results and Second-Look Arthroscopy Findings After Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using 3 Different Types of Grafts

Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstructive surgery by use of bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) allografts, tibialis anterior tendon (TA) allografts, and hamstring tendon (HA) autografts with respect to objective knee testing measures and second-look arthroscopy. Methods We analyzed 338 patients who had undergone anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction between March 2000 and February 2006. BPTB allografts were used in 60 cases, TA allografts in 153 cases, and HA autografts in 125 cases. We compared the grade of range of motion (ROM), Lachman test, pivot-shift test, KT-1000 arthrometric test (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA), and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) knee examination form, as well as second-look arthroscopic findings, at least 1 year after reconstruction. Results The preoperative ROM was not different among the 3 groups ( P > .05), but the BPTB group and TA group showed greater postoperative ROM than the HA group ( P = .028 and P < .001, respectively). There was no difference among the 3 groups in the other objective testing measurements ( P > .05). Synovial coverage of more than 50% was found in 62.5% cases in the BPTB allograft group, 72.3% cases in the TA allograft group, and 90.7% cases in the HA autograft group. The incidence of synovial coverage of more than 50% was higher in the HA autograft group than that in the BPTB and TA allograft groups ( P = .018 and P = .026, respectively). With regard to the IKDC grade, grade A or B was found in 95.2% of the cases with synovial coverage of more than 50% and in 78.3% of the cases with coverage of less than 50% ( P = .011). Conclusions There was no difference in objective knee testing measures among the 3 different graft groups except that the allograft groups showed greater postoperative ROM than the autograft group. However, the HA autograft group had better synovial coverage on second-look arthroscopy, and the group with better synovial coverage on second-look arthroscopy presented better clinical results on the IKDC objective examination form. Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic case series.