Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Revision of failed anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with quadrupled semitendinosus allograft: intermediate-term outcome

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of the present study is to present intermediate-term clinical outcome after revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using semitendinosus allograft from donor less than 65 years old.

Methods

A retrospective study of patients treated with ACL revision from 2003 to 2011 at a District General Hospital. A Study follow-up took place in 2014; clinical outcomes were measured by IKDC, Tegner, Lysholm, and Pain scores and KT-1000 arthrometry laxity measurements. We also registered reoperations and complications.

Results

Nineteen patients were available for follow-up, and one had telephonic interview. Mean follow-up time was 6 (3–9) years and mean age was 33.68 years, and 14 were men and six women. One patient required staged procedures, 5 % were re-revised for early graft failure and clinical instability, and 15 % had reoperations for other pathologies. The data analysis reveals statistically significant differences between preoperative and postoperative scores. Lysholm score improved from preoperatively 55.5 ± 11 points (range 35–71 points) to postoperatively 89.7 ± 10 points (range 55–100 points), Tegner activity scale score improved from 2.7 ± 1.3 points (range 1–5 points) to 7.1 ± 2.2 points (range 1–10). Pain score improved from 7.7 ± 1.5 (range 4–10 points) to 1.1 ± 1.9 (range 0–8 points). Level of Activity score improved from 3.6 ± 1.1 (range 2–6 points) to 8.8 ± 1.6 (range 3–10 points).

Conclusion

In our patient series, revision ACL reconstruction showed a statistically significant improvement in postoperative subjective and objective scores. Five percent failure after mean 6 years (3–9 years) is less compared to other studies; surgical technique and donor age could have played a significant role in lower failure rate. In our series 50 % patients had meniscal and 55 % had Gr I/II chondral injury, this could also explain lower failure rate. Revision of a failed ACL reconstruction using semitendinosus allograft is a safe procedure that improves the function of the patient as demonstrated by clinical scores.

Level of evidence

Retrospective case series, Level IV.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gentleman MH, Friedman MJ (1999) Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 7:189–198

  2. Vorlat P, Verdonk R, Arnauw G (1999) Long term results of tendon allograft for anterior cruciate ligament replacement in revision surgery and in cases of combined complex injuries. Knee surge sports Traumatol Arthrosc 7:318–322

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Jaureguito JW, Paulos LE (1996) Why graft fail. Clin Orthop Relat Res 325:25–41

  4. Wilson TC, Kantaras A, Atay A, Johnson DL (1990) Tunnel enlargement after anterior cruciate ligament surgery. Am J Sports Med 18:262–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ritchie JR, Parker RD (1996) Graft selection in anterior cruciate ligament revision surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 325:65–77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sherman OH, Banffy MB (2004) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: which graft is best? Arthroscopy 20:974–980

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. West RV, Harner CD (2005) Graft selection in ACL reconstruction. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 13:197–207

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Addami S, Frogameni AD, Fenton PJ, Hartman J, Hartman W (1993) Comparison of perioperative morbidity of anterior cruciate ligament autograft versus allograft. Arthroscopy 9:519–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lear GS, Herner CD (2007) Clinical outcomes of allograft verses autograft in ACL reconstruction. Clin Sports Med 26:661–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Centers for Disease Control and prevention (2001) Septic arthritis following ACL reconstruction using tendon allografts: Florida and Louisiana 2000. MMWR 50:1081–1083

    Google Scholar 

  11. Barber FA, McGuire DA, Johnson DH (2003) Point counterpoint: should allografts be used for routine anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions? Arthroscopy 19:421–425

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Frank CB, Jackson DW (1997) Current concepts review; the science of reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Jt Surg Am 79:1556–1576

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Moller E, Weidenhielm L, Werner S (2009) Outcome and knee-related quality of life after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a long-term follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:786–794

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Harner CD, Giffin JR, Dunteman RC, Annunziata CC, Friedman MJ (2001) Evaluation and treatment of recurrent instability after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Instr Course Lect 50:463–474

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gorschewsky O, Browa A, Vogel U, Stauffer E (2002) Clinico histologic comparison of allogenic and autologous bone tendon bone using one third of the patellar tendon in reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Unfallchirurg 105:703–714 (German)

  16. Collette M, Dupont B, Peters M (1991) Reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament with a free graft of the patellar tendon; allograft versus autograft. Acta Prthop Beig 57(Suppl 2):54–60 (French)

  17. Lephart SM, Kocher MS, Harner CD, Fu FH (1993) Quadriceps strength and functional capacity after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction patellar tendon autograft versus allograft. Am J Sports Med 21:267–269 (Chinese)

  18. Stringham DR, Pelmas CJ, Burks RT, Newman AP, Marcus RL (1996) Comparison of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions using patellar tendon allograft or autograft. Arthroscopy 12:414–421

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Briggs KK, Lysholm J, Tegner Y, Rodkey WG, Kocher MS, Steadman JR (2009) The reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Lysholm score and Tegner activity scale for anterior cruciate ligament injuries of the knee: 25 years later. Am J Sports Med 37:890–897

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ferretti A, Conteduca F, Monaco E, De Carli A, D’Arrigo C (2006). Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with doubled semitendinosus and gracilis tendons and lateral extraarticular reconstruction. J Bone Jt Surg Am 88:2373–2379

  21. Fox JA, Pierce M, Bojchuk J, Hayden J, Bush-Joseph CA, Bach BR Jr (2004) Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with nonirradiated fresh-frozen patellar tendon allograft. Arthroscopy 20:787–794

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Johnson DL, Coen MJ (1995) Revision ACL surgery: etiology, indications, techniques, and results. Am J Knee Surg 8:155–167

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tambe AD, Godsiff SP, Mulay S, Joshi M (2006) Anterior cruciate ligament insufficiency: does delay in index surgery affect outcome in recreational athletes. Int Orthop 30(2):104–109

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kamath GV, Redfern JC, Greiswww PE, Burks RT (2011) Revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am ente reconstructions. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:117–124

    Google Scholar 

  25. Harner CD, Olson E, Irrgang JJ, Silverstein S, Fu FH, Silbey M (1996) Allograft versus autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: 3- to 5-year outcome. Clin Orthop Relat Res 324:134–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lind M, Menhert F, Pedersen AB (2009) The first results from the Danish ACL reconstruction registry: epidemiologic and 2 year follow-up results from 5,818 knee ligament reconstructions. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17:117–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Trojani C, Sbihi A, Djian P, Potel JF, Hulet C, Jouve F, Bussiere C, Ehkirch FP, Burdin G, Dubrana F, Beaufils P, Franceschi JP, Chassaing V, Colombet P, Neyret P (2011) Causes for failure of ACL reconstruction and influence of meniscectomies after revision. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:196–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hampton DM, Lamb J, Klimkiewicz JJ (2012) Effect of donor age on patellar tendon allograft ACL reconstruction. Orthopedics 35(8):e1173–e1176, 0147–7447

Download references

Acknowledgments

We wish to express our warm thanks to all the authors who contributed to the study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, East Surrey Hospital, Redhill, RH16EL, UK

    S. Chougule, G. Tselentakis, Stefania Stefan & Georgeos Stefanakis

Authors
  1. S. Chougule
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. Tselentakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stefania Stefan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Georgeos Stefanakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Chougule.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chougule, S., Tselentakis, G., Stefan, S. et al. Revision of failed anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with quadrupled semitendinosus allograft: intermediate-term outcome. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25, 515–523 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-014-1549-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-014-1549-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation