Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

There is no difference between quadriceps- and hamstring tendon autografts in primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a 2-year patient-reported outcome study

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

Abstract

Purpose

Graft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is crucial, however the optimal graft source remains a topic of controversy. The purpose of this study is to compare subjective and functional patient-reported outcomes (PRO) after single-bundle ACL reconstruction using quadriceps tendon (QT) or hamstring tendon (HT) autografts for single-bundle ACL reconstruction. We hypothesize that there is no difference in patient-reported functional outcomes after ACL reconstruction using either HT- or QT autograft.

Methods

All data were extracted from a prospectively collected ACL registry. A total of 80 patients with at least 2-year follow-up were included in this study. A total of 40 patients with primary ACL reconstruction using a QT autograft harvested via a minimally invasive technique were matched by sex, age and pre-injury Tegner and Lysholm score to 40 patients who received HT autografts. Subjective and functional PRO scores including Lysholm score, Tegner activity level and visual analogue scale for pain were obtained at 6, 12 and 24 months after index surgery.

Results

No significant difference between the QT and the HT group was seen at any follow-up in regard to any of the PRO scores for function or pain. 24 months post-surgery the mean Tegner activity score of the HT group was significantly (p = 0.04) lower compared to the pre-injury status. At final follow-up, 27 patients (67.5%) in the QT group and 32 patients (80.0%) in the HT returned to their pre-injury activity level (n.s.). A total of 37 patients (92.5%) of the QT cohort and 35 patients (87.5%) of the HT cohort reported “good” or “excellent” results according to the Lysholm score (n.s.). “No pain” or “slight pain” during severe exertion was reported by 33 patients (82.5%) with QT autograft and 28 patients (82.4%) with HT autograft (n.s.).

Conclusion

There is no significant difference between PRO 2 years post-operative using either QT or HT autografts. Both QT and HT grafts show acceptable and comparable PRO scores making the QT a reliable graft alternative to HT for primary ACL reconstruction.

Level of evidence

III.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. 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(5):890–897

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Briggs KK, Steadman JR, Hay CJ, Hines SL (2009) Lysholm score and Tegner activity level in individuals with normal knees. Am J Sports Med 37(5):898–901

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Buescu CT, Onutu AH, Lucaciu DO, Todor A (2017) Pain level after ACL reconstruction: a comparative study between free quadriceps tendon and hamstring tendons autografts. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. doi:10.1016/j.aott.2017.02.011

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chen CH, Chuang TY, Wang KC, Chen WJ, Shih CH (2006) Arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with quadriceps tendon autograft: clinical outcome in 4–7 years. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14(11):1077–1085

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. DeAngelis JP, Fulkerson JP (2007) Quadriceps tendon—a reliable alternative for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Clin Sports Med 26(4):587–596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Eriksson K, Anderberg P, Hamberg P, Lofgren 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(3):348–354

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fink C, Herbort M, Abermann E, Hoser C (2014) Minimally invasive harvest of a quadriceps tendon graft with or without a bone block. Arthrosc Tech 3(4):e509–e513

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Geib TM, Shelton WR, Phelps RA, Clark L (2009) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using quadriceps tendon autograft: intermediate-term outcome. Arthroscopy 25(12):1408–1414

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gorschewsky O, Klakow A, Putz A, Mahn H, Neumann W (2007) Clinical comparison of the autologous quadriceps tendon (BQT) and the autologous patella tendon (BPTB) for the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15(11):1284–1292

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Group M, Group M (2014) Effect of graft choice on the outcome of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) Cohort. Am J Sports Med 42(10):2301–2310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gulotta LV, Rodeo SA (2007) Biology of autograft and allograft healing in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Clin Sports Med 26(4):509–524

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hamner DL, Brown CH Jr, Steiner ME, Hecker AT, Hayes WC (1999) Hamstring tendon grafts for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: biomechanical evaluation of the use of multiple strands and tensioning techniques. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81(4):549–557

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Han HS, Seong SC, Lee S, Lee MC (2008) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: quadriceps versus patellar autograft. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466(1):198–204

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Harris NL, Smith DA, Lamoreaux L, Purnell M (1997) Central quadriceps tendon for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Part I: morphometric and biomechanical evaluation. Am J Sports Med 25(1):23–28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Herbort M, Michel P, Raschke MJ, Vogel N, Schulze M, Zoll A, Fink C, Petersen W, Domnick C (2016) Should the ipsilateral hamstrings be used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the case of medial collateral ligament insufficiency? Am J Sports Med 10(1177/0363546516677728):363546516677728

    Google Scholar 

  16. Herbort M, Tecklenburg K, Zantop T, Raschke MJ, Hoser C, Schulze M, Petersen W, Fink C (2013) Single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a biomechanical cadaveric study of a rectangular quadriceps and bone–patellar tendon–bone graft configuration versus a round hamstring graft. Arthroscopy 29(12):1981–1990

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Herrington L (2013) Functional outcome from anterior cruciate ligament surgery: a review. OA Orthop 1(2):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Holm I, Oiestad BE, Risberg MA, Aune AK (2010) No difference in knee function or prevalence of osteoarthritis after reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament with 4-strand hamstring autograft versus patellar tendon–bone autograft: a randomized study with 10-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 38(3):448–454

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ibrahim SA, Al-Kussary IM, Al-Misfer AR, Al-Mutairi HQ, Ghafar SA, El Noor TA (2005) Clinical evaluation of arthroscopically assisted anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: patellar tendon versus gracilis and semitendinosus autograft. Arthroscopy 21(4):412–417

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Imran A, O’Connor JJ (1998) Control of knee stability after ACL injury or repair: interaction between hamstrings contraction and tibial translation. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 13(3):153–162

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Keays SL, Bullock-Saxton JE, Keays AC, Newcombe PA, Bullock MI (2007) A 6-year follow-up of the effect of graft site on strength, stability, range of motion, function, and joint degeneration after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: patellar tendon versus semitendinosus and Gracilis tendon graft. Am J Sports Med 35(5):729–739

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kim SJ, Kumar P, Oh KS (2009) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: autogenous quadriceps tendon–bone compared with bone–patellar tendon–bone grafts at 2-year follow-up. Arthroscopy 25(2):137–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kim SJ, Lee SK, Choi CH, Kim SH, Kim SH, Jung M (2014) Graft selection in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for smoking patients. Am J Sports Med 42(1):166–172

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kocher MS, Steadman JR, Briggs KK, Sterett WI, Hawkins RJ (2004) Relationships between objective assessment of ligament stability and subjective assessment of symptoms and function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 32(3):629–634

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee JK, Lee S, Lee MC (2016) Outcomes of anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: bone-quadriceps tendon graft versus double-bundle hamstring tendon graft. Am J Sports Med 44(9):2323–2329

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee S, Seong SC, Jo CH, Han HS, An JH, Lee MC (2007) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with use of autologous quadriceps tendon graft. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(Suppl 3):116–126

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lee S, Seong SC, Jo H, Park YK, Lee MC (2004) Outcome of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using quadriceps tendon autograft. Arthroscopy 20(8):795–802

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Liden M, Ejerhed L, Sernert N, Laxdal G, Kartus J (2007) Patellar tendon or semitendinosus tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized study with a 7-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 35(5):740–748

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lund B, Nielsen T, Fauno P, Christiansen SE, Lind M (2014) Is quadriceps tendon a better graft choice than patellar tendon? A prospective randomized study. Arthroscopy 30(5):593–598

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Mae T, Shino K, Matsumoto N, Maeda A, Nakata K, Yoneda M (2010) Graft tension during active knee extension exercise in anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 26(2):214–222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Magnussen RA, Carey JL, Spindler KP (2011) Does autograft choice determine intermediate-term outcome of ACL reconstruction? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(3):462–472

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Mohtadi N, Chan D, Barber R, Oddone Paolucci E (2015) A randomized clinical trial comparing patellar tendon, hamstring tendon, and double-bundle ACL reconstructions: patient-reported and clinical outcomes at a minimal 2-year follow-up. Clin J Sport Med 25(4):321–331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mohtadi NG, Chan DS, Dainty KN, Whelan DB (2011) Patellar tendon versus hamstring tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament rupture in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005960.pub2(9):CD005960

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. More RC, Karras BT, Neiman R, Fritschy D, Woo SL, Daniel DM (1993) Hamstrings—an anterior cruciate ligament protagonist. An in vitro study. Am J Sports Med 21(2):231–237

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mulford JS, Hutchinson SE, Hang JR (2013) Outcomes for primary anterior cruciate reconstruction with the quadriceps autograft: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(8):1882–1888

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Noyes FR, Barber-Westin SD (2006) Anterior cruciate ligament revision reconstruction: results using a quadriceps tendon–patellar bone autograft. Am J Sports Med 34(4):553–564

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Noyes FR, Butler DL, Grood ES, Zernicke RF, Hefzy MS (1984) Biomechanical analysis of human ligament grafts used in knee-ligament repairs and reconstructions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 66(3):344–352

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Otsuka H, Ishibashi Y, Tsuda E, Sasaki K, Toh S (2003) Comparison of three techniques of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bone–patellar tendon–bone graft. Differences in anterior tibial translation and tunnel enlargement with each technique. Am J Sports Med 31(2):282–288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Paessler HH, Mastrokalos DS (2003) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using semitendinosus and gracilis tendons, bone patellar tendon, or quadriceps tendon–graft with press-fit fixation without hardware. A new and innovative procedure. Orthop Clin N Am 34(1):49–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Renstrom PA (2013) Eight clinical conundrums relating to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury in sport: recent evidence and a personal reflection. Br J Sports Med 47(6):367–372

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Roe J, Pinczewski LA, Russell VJ, Salmon LJ, Kawamata T, Chew M (2005) A 7-year follow-up of patellar tendon and hamstring tendon grafts for arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: differences and similarities. Am J Sports Med 33(9):1337–1345

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Sajovic M, Vengust V, Komadina R, Tavcar R, Skaza K (2006) A prospective, randomized comparison of semitendinosus and gracilis tendon versus patellar tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: five-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 34(12):1933–1940

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Sasaki N, Farraro KF, Kim KE, Woo SL (2014) Biomechanical evaluation of the quadriceps tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cadaveric study. Am J Sports Med 42(3):723–730

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Schulz AP, Lange V, Gille J, Voigt C, Frohlich S, Stuhr M, Jurgens C (2013) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using bone plug-free quadriceps tendon autograft: intermediate-term clinical outcome after 24–36 months. Open Access J Sports Med 4:243–249

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Shaieb MD, Kan DM, Chang SK, Marumoto JM, Richardson AB (2002) A prospective randomized comparison of patellar tendon versus semitendinosus and gracilis tendon autografts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 30(2):214–220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Shelton WR, Fagan BC (2011) Autografts commonly used in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 19(5):259–264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Slone HS, Romine SE, Premkumar A, Xerogeanes JW (2015) Quadriceps tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comprehensive review of current literature and systematic review of clinical results. Arthroscopy 31(3):541–554

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Smigielski R, Zdanowicz U, Drwiega M, Ciszek B, Ciszkowska-Lyson B, Siebold R (2015) Ribbon like appearance of the midsubstance fibres of the anterior cruciate ligament close to its femoral insertion site: a cadaveric study including 111 knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(11):3143–3150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Staubli HU, Schatzmann L, Brunner P, Rincon L, Nolte LP (1996) Quadriceps tendon and patellar ligament: cryosectional anatomy and structural properties in young adults. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 4(2):100–110

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Staubli HU, Schatzmann L, Brunner P, Rincon L, Nolte LP (1999) Mechanical tensile properties of the quadriceps tendon and patellar ligament in young adults. Am J Sports Med 27(1):27–34

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Xerogeanes JW, Mitchell PM, Karasev PA, Kolesov IA, Romine SE (2013) Anatomic and morphological evaluation of the quadriceps tendon using 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging reconstruction: applications for anterior cruciate ligament autograft choice and procurement. Am J Sports Med 41(10):2392–2399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Zaffagnini S, Marcacci M, Lo Presti M, Giordano G, Iacono F, Neri MP (2006) Prospective and randomized evaluation of ACL reconstruction with three techniques: a clinical and radiographic evaluation at 5 years follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14(11):1060–1069

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Filippo Piana for his help within the data acquisition and Kevin Boehm for his help with the manuscript.

Authors’ contribution

AR was involved in the conception or design, acquisition, analysis, interpretation of data, drafting of the manuscript and final approval; GW was involved in the analysis, interpretation of data, drafting of the manuscript, critical revision of the manuscript and final approval; EH was involved in the analysis, interpretation of data, critical revision of the manuscript and final approval; CH was involved in the acquisition, analysis, interpretation of data, critical revision of the manuscript and final approval; MH was involved in the analysis, interpretation of data, critical revision of the manuscript and final approval; PG was involved in the conception or design, critical revision of the manuscript and final approval; CH was involved in the conception or design, critical revision of the manuscript and final approval; CF was involved in the conception or design, critical revision of the manuscript and final approval.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gelenkpunkt, Sport- and Joint Surgery, Olympiastrasse 36, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria

    Armin Runer, Guido Wierer, Elmar Herbst, Caroline Hepperger, Peter Gföller, Christian Hoser & Christian Fink

  2. Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

    Armin Runer

  3. Department of Traumatology and Sports Injuries, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria

    Guido Wierer

  4. Department for Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany

    Elmar Herbst

  5. Department of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Westphalian Wilhelms University Muenster, Muenster, Germany

    Mirco Herbort

  6. ISAG – Institute for Sports Medicine, Alpine Medicine and Health Tourism/UMIT, Hall in Tirol, Austria

    Christian Fink

Authors
  1. Armin Runer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Guido Wierer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elmar Herbst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Caroline Hepperger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mirco Herbort
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Peter Gföller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Christian Hoser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Christian Fink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Gföller.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Christan Fink received royalties from Karl Storz and consultancies from Karl Storz and Medacta. All other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Funding

None.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants as well as the used registry were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional review board (IRB) of the Medical University of Innsbruck (AN2015-0050346/4.28) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all patients included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Runer, A., Wierer, G., Herbst, E. et al. There is no difference between quadriceps- and hamstring tendon autografts in primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a 2-year patient-reported outcome study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26, 605–614 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4554-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4554-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation