Mid-Term Outcomes of the All-Soft Quadriceps Tendon Autograft Are Noninferior to Hamstring Autograft in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Comparison With Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

ABSTRACT

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to compare the 5-year clinical and functional outcomes of the soft tissue quadriceps tendon (QT) to those of the hamstring tendon (HT) autograft

Methods

A retrospective review of patients undergoing ACL reconstruction using either soft tissue QT or double tendon HT autograft with at least 5 years of follow up was conducted. Surgical technique included anteromedial portal creation for the femoral tunnel and transtibial technique for the tibia. Graft fixation was achieved with interference composite screws for the QT and combination of interference composite screw and suture button for the HT cohort. The two groups were compared for differences in outcomes including International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm score, return to sport, and complications.

Results

A total of 37 patients with QT autograft and 46 HT autografts were included in the study with a mean follow up of 69.9 months and 70.9 months, respectively. The QT group demonstrated a larger graft size on average (9.64mm vs. 7.90mm, p <0.001). The IKDC and Lysholm scores were similar between the two groups at 2-years postoperatively. At 5-years postoperatively, the QT group demonstrated significantly greater IKDC (p 0.018) and Lysholm (p 0.007) scores. The cohorts demonstrated similar rates of achieving minimal clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds at both 2 and 5 years postoperatively. The two groups also demonstrated comparable rates of return to sport, time to return, and postoperative complications.

Conclusions

Although the QT autograft demonstrated increased patient reported outcome scores when compared to the HT at 5-years postoperatively, there was no clinically significant difference between the cohorts at 2 or 5 years postoperatively. The QT autograft is an effective alternative to HT autograft with non-inferior results to the hamstring autograft at mid-term follow up.

Study Design

Retrospective Comparison Study; Level of Evidence III

Level of evidence

III, retrospective cohort study