.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Quadriceps Tendon Autografts Are Associated With Increased Short-term Reoperation Rates for Extension Deficit or Pain and Inferior Patient-Reported Outcomes Compared With Hamstring Tendon Autografts: An Analysis of 5653 Cases of Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
C
R
A
C
DOI：10.1177/03635465261465107.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Background:</jats:title>
<jats:p>Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) rates are rising, and quadriceps tendon (QT) autografts have gained popularity in recent years. Although QT autografts show objective and subjective outcomes comparable to hamstring tendon (HT) and bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) autografts, nonrevision reoperations across graft types and their impact on patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores remain poorly studied.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Purpose:</jats:title>
<jats:p>To compare nonrevision reoperation rates and PROM scores between primary ACLR using HT, BPTB, and QT autografts at 2 years’ follow-up.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Study Design:</jats:title>
<jats:p>Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Methods:</jats:title>
<jats:p>
In this retrospective cohort study, 5653 primary ACLR procedures (2015-2022) were categorized by autograft type. Reoperations for extension deficit or pain, meniscal injuries, or cartilage injuries within 2 years were identified through medical records. Revision ACLR and graft failure were not included. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). The minimal important change, patient acceptable symptom state, and treatment failure were evaluated using the KOOS
<jats:sub>4</jats:sub>
. Subgroup analysis examined associations between graft diameter, sex, and reoperations for extension deficit or pain.
</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Results:</jats:title>
<jats:p>
The QT group had a higher overall reoperation rate (19.2%) than the HT (8.9%) and BPTB (6.9%) groups (
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
< .001), driven by extension deficit or pain (11.9% vs 5.5% and 4.7%, respectively;
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
< .001). QT grafts remained independently associated with reoperations for extension deficit or pain after adjusting for confounders (odds ratio [OR], 1.96 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.44-2.67];
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
< .001). The QT group demonstrated lower odds of achieving the minimal important change than the HT (OR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.41-0.77];
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
< .001) and BPTB (OR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.32-0.72];
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
< .001) groups. The QT and BPTB groups showed higher odds of experiencing treatment failure (OR, 1.98 [95% CI, 1.21-3.23];
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
= .01 and OR, 2.00 [95% CI, 1.10-3.63];
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
= .02) and lower odds of achieving the patient acceptable symptom state (OR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.49-0.85];
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
= .002 and OR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.41-0.79];
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
< .001) than the HT group. On sex-stratified analysis, female patients demonstrated higher reoperation rates for extension deficit or pain than male patients (7.3% vs 5.5%, respectively;
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
= .01), and female patients receiving larger grafts (9.5-12.0 mm) demonstrated 72% higher odds of having this outcome (OR, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.14-2.56];
<jats:italic toggle="yes">P</jats:italic>
= .01).
</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
<jats:sec>
<jats:title>Conclusion:</jats:title>
<jats:p>QT autografts were associated with significantly higher reoperation rates for extension deficit or pain and inferior PROM scores compared with HT autografts at 2 years after primary ACLR.</jats:p>
</jats:sec>
Journal
IF:
4.5
Papers:
9.4K
Citations:
4.0W
Organization
Cited Papers