Author:
Meng Qingyang,Dai Ruilan,Wang Cheng,Shi Weili,Jiang Yanfang,Liu Ningjing,Li Rui,Ao Yingfang,Gong Xi,Ma Yong
Abstract
Abstract
Background
From the perspective of graft protection and early rehabilitation during the maturation and remodeling phases of graft healing, suture augmentation (SA) for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) has attracted more and more attention.
Study Design
Retrospective study.
Purpose
To determine whether the additional SA affects clinical results, graft maturation and graft-bone interface healing during two years follow-up after ACLR.
Methods
20 ACLRs with additional SA (ACLR-SA group) and 20 ACLRs without additional SA (ACLR group) were performed between January 2020 and December 2021 by the same surgeon and were retrospectively analyzed. Pre- and postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, Lysholm scores, graft failure and reoperation were evaluated. The signal/noise quotient (SNQ) of autografts and the signal intensity of graft-bone interface were analyzed. All 40 patients in ACLR-SA group and ACLR group completed 2-years follow-up.
Results
There was no patient in the two cohorts experienced graft failure and reoperation. The postoperative IKDC and Lysholm scores have been significantly improved compared with preoperative scored in both ACLR-SA group and ACLR group, however, there was no significant difference between two groups. The SNQ of proximal graft of ACLR-SA group (14.78 ± 8.62 vs. 8.1 ± 5.5, p = 0.041) was significantly greater while the grades of graft-bone interface healing of posterior tibial was significantly lower than that of ACLR group at 1-year postoperatively (p = 0.03), respectively. There were no significant differences between the two groups of the SNQ of proximal, distal medial graft segments, and the graft-bone interface healing grades of anterior femoral, posterior femoral, anterior tibial and posterior tibial at other time points (p>0.05).
Conclusions
The additional SA in ACLR had no effect on IKDC scores, Lysholm scores, graft maturation and graft-bone interface healing at 2-year postoperatively. Our research does not support the routine use of SA in ACLR.
Funder
Peking University Medicine Sailing Program for Young Scholars’ Scientific & Technological Innovation
Innovation and Transformation Fund Project of Peking University Third Hospital
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference30 articles.
1. Musahl V, Karlsson J. Anterior cruciate ligament tear. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(24):2341–8.
2. Moatshe G, Kweon CY, Gee AO, Engebretsen L. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is not for all-a need for improved patient selection. Br J Sports Med. 2021;55(22):1245–6.
3. Gwinner C, Janosec M, Wierer G, Wagner M, Weiler A. Graft Survivorship after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction based on tibial slope. Am J Sports Med. 2021;49(14):3802–8.
4. Rodeo SA, Kawamura S, Ma CB, Deng XH, Sussman PS, Hays P, Ying L. The effect of osteoclastic activity on tendon-to-bone healing: an experimental study in rabbits. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(10):2250–9.
5. Vavken P, Sadoghi P, Murray MM. The effect of platelet concentrates on graft maturation and graft-bone interface healing in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in human patients: a systematic review of controlled trials. Arthroscopy. 2011;27(11):1573–83.