Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Isokinetic quadriceps and hamstring muscle strength and knee function 5 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: comparison between bone-patellar tendon-bone and hamstring tendon autografts

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Existing clinical studies have not proven which graft is to be preferred in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. In recent years, bone-patellar tendon-bone and hamstring tendons have been the most frequently used graft types. Muscle strength deficit is one of the consequences after ACL reconstruction. The aim of this study was to evaluate possible differences in hamstring and quadriceps muscle strength and knee function 5 years after ACL reconstruction between the BPTB and the STG groups. The study group consisted of 288 patients (132 women, 156 men) with a unilateral ACL rupture who had received a BPTB (175 patients) or STG (113 patients) ACL reconstruction. Lower extremity concentric isokinetic peak extension and flexion torques were assessed at the angular velocities of 60°/s and 180°/s. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), the Tegner activity level, the Lysholm knee and the Kujala patellofemoral scores were also collected. Isokinetic quadriceps peak torque (percentage of the contralateral side) was 3.9% higher in the STG group than in the BPTB group at the velocity of 60°/s and 3.2% higher at the velocity of 180°/s and the isokinetic hamstring peak torque 2% higher in the BPTB group than in the STG group at the velocity of 60°/s and 2.5% higher at the velocity of 180°/s. In both groups the subjects had weaker quadriceps and hamstring muscle strength in the injured extremity compared with the uninjured one. In the single-leg hop test (according to the IKDC recommendations) there was a statistically significant difference (P = 0.040) between the groups. In the STG group, 68% of the patients had the single-leg hop ratio (injured vs. uninjured extremity) ≥90%, 31% of the patients 75–89% and 1% of the patients <75%, while in the BPTB group the corresponding percentages were 72, 21 and 7%. However, no statistically significant differences in clinical outcome were found between the groups as determined by the IKDC, Tegner activity level, Lysholm knee and Kujala patellofemoral scores.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aglietti P, Buzzi R, Zaccherotti G, Be Biase P (1994) Patellar tendon versus doubled semitendinosus and gracilis tendons for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 22:211–218. doi:10.1177/036354659402200210

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Aglietti P, Giron F, Buzzi R, Biddau F, Sasso F (2004) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: bone-patellar tendon-bone compared with double semitendinosus and gracilis tendon grafts. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86A:2143–2155

    Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson A, Snyder R, Lipscomb A (2001) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 29:272–279

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Armour T, Forwell L, Litchfield R, Kirkley A, Amendola N, Fowler P (2004) Isokinetic evaluation of internal/external tibial rotation strength after the use of hamstring tendons for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 32:1639–1643. doi:10.1177/0363546504263405

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Aune A, Holm I, Risberg M, Jensen H, Steen H (2001) Four-strand hamstring tendon autograft compared with patellar tendon-bone autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 29:722–728

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Beard D, Anderson J, Davies S, Price A, Dodd C (2001) Hamstrings vs. patella tendon for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomised controlled trial. Knee 8:45–50. doi:10.1016/S0968-0160(01)00062-X

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Beynnon BD, Johnson RJ, Abate JA, Fleming BC, Kannus P, Kaplan M, Samani J, Renström P (2002) Anterior cruciate ligament replacement: comparison of bone-patellar tendon-bone grafts with two-strand hamstring grafts. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84A:1503–1513

    Google Scholar 

  8. Beynnon BD, Johnson RJ, Abate JA, Fleming BC, Nichols CE (2005) Treatment of anterior cruciate ligament injuries, part I. Am J Sports Med 33:1579–1602

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bizzini M, Gorelick M, Munzinger U, Drobny T (2006) Joint laxity and isokinetic muscle strength characteristics after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: bone patellar tendon versus quadrupled hamstring autografts. Clin J Sport Med 16:4–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Carter T, Edinger S (1999) Isokinetic evaluation of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: hamstring versus patellar tendon. Arthroscopy 15:169–172. doi:10.1053/ar.1999.v15.0150161

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Eastlack ME, Axe MJ, Snyder-Mackler L (1999) Laxity, instability and functional outcome after ACL injury: copers versus noncopers. Med Sci Sports Exerc 31:210–215. doi:10.1097/00005768-199902000-00002

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ejerhed L, Kartus J, Sernert N, Köhler K, Karlsson J (2003) Patellar tendon or semitendinosus tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? Am J Sports Med 31:19–25

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eriksson K, Anderberg P, Hamberg P, Löfgren AC, Bredenberg M, Westman I, Wredmark T (2001) A comparison of quadruple semitendinosus and patellar tendon grafts in reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83:348–354. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.83B3.11685

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Eriksson K, Anderberg P, Hamberg P, Olerud P, Wredmark T (2001) There are differences in early morbidity after ACL reconstruction when comparing patellar tendon and semitendinosus tendon graft. Scand J Med Sci Sports 11:170–177

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Feller J, Webster K, Gavin B (2001) Early post-operative morbidity following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: patellar tendon versus hamstring graft. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 9:260–266. doi:10.1007/s001670100216

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Harilainen A, Linko E, Sandelin J (2006) Randomized prospective study of ACL reconstruction with interference screw fixation in patellar tendon autografts versus femoral metal plate suspension and tibial post fixation in hamstring tendon autografts: 5-year clinical and radiological follow-up results. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:517–528. doi:10.1007/s00167-006-0059-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hefti F, Müller W, Jakob RP, Staubli HU (1993) Evaluation of knee ligament injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1:226–234

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Herrington L, Wrapson C, Matthews M, Matthews H (2005) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, hamstring versus bone-patella tendon-bone grafts: a systematic literature review of outcome from surgery. Knee 12:41–50. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2004.02.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hiemstra LA, Webber S, MacDonald PB, Kriellaars DJ (2000) Knee strength deficits after hamstring tendon and patellar tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1472–1479 doi:10.1097/00005768-200008000-00016

  20. Hiemstra LA, Webber S, MacDonald PB, Kriellaars DJ (2007) Contralateral limb strength deficits after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a hamstring tendon graft. Clin Biomech 22:543–550. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2007.01.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Jansson K, Linko E, Sandelin J, Harilainen A (2003) A prospective randomized study of patellar versus hamstring tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 31:12–18

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Järvelä T, Kannus P, Latvala K, Järvinen M (2002) Simple measurements in assessing muscle performance after an ACL reconstruction. Int J Sports Med 23:196–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kannus P, Latvala K, Järvinen M (1987) Thigh muscle strengths in the anterior cruciate ligament deficient knee. Isokinetic and isometric long-term results. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 9:223–227

    Google Scholar 

  24. Keays S, Bullock-Saxton J, Keays A, Newcombe P (2001) Muscle strength and function before and after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using semitendinosus and gracilis. Knee 8:229–234. doi:10.1016/S0968-0160(01)00099-0

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Kujala UM, Jaakkola LH, Koskinen SK, Taimela S, Hurme M, Nelimarkka O (1993) Scoring of patellofemoral disorders. Arthroscopy 9:159–163. doi:10.1016/S0749-8063(05)80366-4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Laxdal G, Sernert N, Ejerhed L, Karlsson J, Kartus J (2007) A prospective comparison of bone-patellar tendon-bone and hamstring tendon grafts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in male patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15:115–125. doi:10.1007/s00167-006-0165-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Makihara Y, Nishino A, Fukubayashi T, Kanamori A (2006) Decrease of knee flexion torque in patients with ACL reconstruction: combined analysis of the architecture and function of the knee flexor muscles. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:310–317. doi:10.1007/s00167-005-0701-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Marder R, Raskind J, Carroll M (1991) Prospective evaluation of arthroscopically assisted anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: patellar tendon versus semitendinosus and gracilis tendons. Am J Sports Med 19:478–484. doi:10.1177/036354659101900510

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Mikkelsen C, Werner S, Eriksson E (2000) Closed kinetic chain alone compared to combined open and closed kinetic chain exercises for quadriceps strengthening after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with respect to return to sports: a prospective matched follow-up study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 8:337–342. doi:10.1007/s001670000143

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Nakamura N, Horibe S, Sasaki S, Kitaguchi T, Tagami M, Mitsuoka T, Toritsuka Y, Hamada M, Shino K (2002) Evaluation of active knee flexion and hamstring strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using hamstring tendons. Arthroscopy 18:598–602. doi:10.1053/jars.2002.32868

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Natri A, Järvinen M, Latvala K, Kannus P (1996) Isokinetic muscle performance after anterior cruciate ligament surgery Long-term results and outcome predicting factors after primary surgery and late-phase reconstruction. Int J Sports Med 17:223–228. doi:10.1055/s-2007-972836

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Osteras H, Augestad LB, Tondel S (1998) Isokinetic muscle strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Scand J Med Sci Sports 8:279–282

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Sachs RA, Daniel DM, Stone ML, Garfein RF (1989) Patellofemoral problems after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 7:760–765. doi:10.1177/036354658901700606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Sekiya I, Muneta T, Ogiuchi T (1998) Significance of the single-legged hop test to the anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee in relation to muscle strength and anterior laxity. Am J Sports Med 26:384–388

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Seto J, Orofino A, Morrissey M, Medeiros J, Mason W (1988) Assessment of quadriceps/hamstring strength, knee ligament stability, functional and sports activity levels five years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 16:170–180. doi:10.1177/036354658801600215

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Shelbourne KD, Gray T (1997) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autogenous patellar tendon graft followed by accelerated rehabilitation. A two-to nine-year followup. Am J Sports Med 25:786–795. doi:10.1177/036354659702500610

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Snyder-Mackler L, De Luca P, Williams P, Eastlack M, Bartolozzi A (1994) Reflex inhibition of the quadriceps femoris muscle after injury or reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Am 76:555–560

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Tashiro T, Kurosawa H, Kawakami A, Hikita A, Fukui N (2003) Influence of medial hamstring tendon harvest on knee flexor strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a detailed evaluation with comparison of single- and double-tendon harvest. Am J Sports Med 31:522–529. doi:10.1177/31.4.522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Tegner Y, Lysholm J (1985) Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop 198:43–49. doi:10.1097/00003086-198509000-00007

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Webster K, Feller J, Hameister K (2001) Bone tunnel enlargement following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomised comparison of hamstring and patellar tendon grafts with 2-year follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 9:86–91. doi:10.1007/s001670100191

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Wilk KE, Romaniello WT, Soscia SM, Arrigo CA, Andrews JR (1994) The relationship between subjective knee scores, isokinetic testing and functional testing in the ACL-reconstructed knee. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 20:60–73

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Health centre of Miehikkälä, Keskustie 1, 49700, Miehikkälä, Finland

    Riitta Lautamies

  2. ORTON Orthopaedic Hospital, Invalid Foundation, Tenholantie 10, 00280, Helsinki, Finland

    Arsi Harilainen & Jerker Sandelin

  3. ORTON Research Institute, Invalid Foundation, Tenholantie 10, 00280, Helsinki, Finland

    Jyrki Kettunen

  4. Department of Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, P.O Box 35 (LL), 40014, Jyväskylä, Finland

    Urho M. Kujala

Authors
  1. Riitta Lautamies
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arsi Harilainen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jyrki Kettunen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jerker Sandelin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Urho M. Kujala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Riitta Lautamies.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lautamies, R., Harilainen, A., Kettunen, J. et al. Isokinetic quadriceps and hamstring muscle strength and knee function 5 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: comparison between bone-patellar tendon-bone and hamstring tendon autografts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthr 16, 1009–1016 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-008-0598-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-008-0598-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation