ACL Reconstruction Using Quadrupled Semitendinosus Versus Double-Stranded Semitendinosus and Gracilis Autograft: 2-Year Results From a Prospective Randomized Controlled Study

Abstract

Background: A disadvantage of using hamstring tendon autograft consisting of the semitendinosus and gracilis tendons for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is pain from tendon harvesting and persistent hamstring weakness. In the tendon-sparing all-inside technique, a quadrupled semitendinosus graft and adjustable-loop cortical fixation are suggested to give less postoperative flexion deficits while displaying overall similar clinical results to the traditional hamstring technique. However, there are a limited number of high-quality studies comparing these techniques with inconsistent results. Purpose: To investigate differences between the all-inside (quadrupled semitendinosus) and traditional hamstring (double-stranded semitendinosus and gracilis) technique regarding (1) self-reported function, (2) hamstring strength, and (3) knee laxity. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 98 patients were randomized to either the all-inside or the traditional hamstring technique. Perioperatively, duration of surgery and graft size were obtained. The International Knee Documentation Committee 2000 Subjective Knee Form score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Tegner Activity Scale score, knee laxity (KT-1000 arthrometer side-to-side difference and pivot shift), range of motion, isokinetic knee strength, and hop test score were collected preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. Return-to-sport readiness was evaluated 9 months postoperatively. Results: A total of 89 patients completed 2-year follow-up, 45 patients with the all-inside technique and 44 patients with the traditional hamstring technique. There were no significant differences between groups in any of the outcome measures 2 years after surgery, but there was a tendency in the all-inside group toward having increased anterior translation (mean, 3.6 mm vs 2.7 mm), a higher number of revision surgeries (5 patients vs 2 patients), and more patients having +1 and +2 pivot-shift values (29 vs 18 patients) when compared with the traditional group. Conclusion: The all-inside technique yields equivalent results to the traditional hamstring technique 2 years after surgery and should be considered a reliable technique to use for ACL reconstruction. Sparing the gracilis tendon does not lead to less persistent hamstring weakness. Long-term follow-up is needed to further determine whether the tendency of increased anterior translation seen at 2 years postoperatively will lead to a higher risk of graft failure.