Medial Collateral Ligament Reconstruction With Autograft Versus Allograft: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background: Medial collateral ligament (MCL) reconstruction (MCLR) is performed after failed nonoperative treatment or high-grade MCL injury with associated valgus instability. Purpose: To evaluate clinical outcomes after MCLR with autograft versus allograft. Study Design: Systematic review, Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The authors conducted a search of the PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to identify studies comparing outcomes of MCLR with autograft versus allograft. Studies were included if they evaluated clinical outcomes after MCLR using autograft and/or allograft. Any study that included concomitant knee ligament injury other than the anterior cruciate ligament injury was excluded. A quality assessment was performed using the modified Coleman Methodology Score. Results: The initial search identified 746 studies, 17 of which met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. The studies included 307 patients: 151 (49.2%) patients received autografts, and 156 (50.8%) received allografts. The most used autograft was the semitendinosus tendon (136 grafts; 90.1% of specified allografts), and the only allograft used was the Achilles tendon (110 grafts; 100% of specified autografts). The mean follow-up of the studies was 25.6 months. Postoperative pain (Lysholm scores) ranged from 82.9 to 94.8 in patients receiving autografts and 87.5 to 93 in patients receiving allografts. Postoperative range of motion was full in 8 of 15 (53.3%) patients receiving autografts compared with 82 of 93 (88.2%) patients receiving allografts. Five of the 151 (3.3%) patients who had MCLR with autografts had complications such as infection, instability, and prominent screws. Two of the 156 (1.3%) MCLRs with allografts developed complications of prominent screws and nonhealing incisions. Conclusion: MCLR with either autografts or allografts leads to improved patient-reported, radiographic, and clinical outcomes. Patient-reported postoperative pain was similar in patients receiving either graft type. Other outcomes were difficult to compare between graft types because of nonstandardized reporting and a lack of pre- and postoperative measurements. Therefore, there is no evidence of significantly improved outcomes in the use of either autograft or allograft with MCLR.