Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A prospective randomized controlled study of hamstring and bone-free quadriceps tendons autografts in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction

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

Abstract

Introduction

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is one of the most common surgical procedures worldwide. However, the ideal graft source is still debatable. This study compared hamstring (HT) and bone-free quadriceps (QT) tendon autografts in terms of muscle strength and patient-reported outcomes.

Methods

Between June 2018 and December 2019, 46 patients were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned to one of two groups for the ACL reconstruction surgery—the HT autograft group or the QT autograft group. An experienced examiner performed preoperative and postoperative examinations. The HUMAC NORM isokinetic machine (Computer Sports Medicine International-CSMI, 2004) was used to assess flexor and extensor thigh muscle strength. Both groups received the same surgical technique and fixation method. All patients were examined after three, six, nine, and 12 months. The final evaluations were performed at the 24-month follow-up. Patients’ scores on the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) evaluation form and the Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale were used to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. The two groups were also compared in terms of postoperative complications and activity levels.

Results

The difference between preoperative and postoperative knee flexor peak torques (FPT) was lower in the QT group than in the HT group. The average difference between preoperative and postoperative knee extensor peak torque (EPT) was higher in the QT group than in the HT group. As a result, the HT group had a lower postoperative H/Q ratio (flexor strength normalized to body mass divided by extensor strength normalized to body mass) than the QT group (p < 0.001). The mean IKDC scores for the HT and QT groups were 90.13 ± 6.99 and 87.12 ± 6.61, respectively. The scores of the two groups postoperatively were close, and both groups showed significant improvement. The average graft size in the QT group was significantly greater than that in the HT group. Saphenous nerve palsy was the most common complication in the HT group (22%). Thigh hematomas were observed in two patients in the QT group and required urgent intervention (12%).

Conclusion

After ACL reconstruction, we found a significant decrease in strength at the donor sites in both techniques, with similar patient-reported measures and stability outcomes. The H/Q strength ratio was higher in the QT group postoperatively, which may have a protective effect on the reconstructed ligament.

Level of Evidence I It is a randomized controlled trial.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ANOVA:

Analyses of the variance

ACL:

Anterior cruciate ligament

ACLR:

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

BW:

Body weight

Cm:

Centimeters

CSMI:

Computer Sports Medicine International

EPT:

Extensor peak torques

FPT:

Flexor peak torques

HT:

Hamstring tendon

H/Q:

Hamstring/quadriceps

IKDC:

International Knee Documentation Committee

IPBSN:

Infrapatellar branch of the saphenous nerve

KOOS:

The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score

Mm:

Millimeters

Nm:

Newton-meters

PROM:

Patient-reported outcome measures

PT:

Patellar tendon

QT:

Quadriceps tendon

SD:

Standard deviation

TC:

Thigh circumference

References

  1. Sherman OH, Banffy MB (2004) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: which graft is best? Arthroscopy 20(9):974–980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2004.08.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Arnold MP, Calcei JG, Vogel N, Magnussen RA, Clatworthy M, Spalding T, Campbell JD, Bergfeld JA, Sherman SL, Group ACLS (2021) ACL Study Group survey reveals the evolution of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction graft choice over the past three decades. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 29(11):3871–3876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06443-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Macaulay AA, Perfetti DC, Levine WN (2012) Anterior cruciate ligament graft choices. Sports Health 4(1):63–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1941738111409890

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Aitchison AH, Alcoloumbre D, Mintz DN, Hidalgo Perea S, Nguyen JT, Cordasco FA, Green DW (2021) MRI signal intensity of quadriceps tendon autograft and hamstring tendon autograft 1 year after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in adolescent athletes. Am J Sports Med 49(13):3502–3507. https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465211040472

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cavaignac E, Coulin B, Tscholl P, Nik Mohd Fatmy N, Duthon V, Menetrey J (2017) Is quadriceps tendon autograft a better choice than hamstring autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A comparative study With a mean follow-up of 3.6 years. Am J Sports Med 45(6):1326–1332. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546516688665

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nyland J, Collis P, Huffstutler A, Sachdeva S, Spears JR, Greene J, Caborn DNM (2020) Quadriceps tendon autograft ACL reconstruction has less pivot shift laxity and lower failure rates than hamstring tendon autografts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(2):509–518. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05720-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Runer A, Wierer G, Herbst E, Hepperger C, Herbort M, Gföller P, Hoser C, Fink C (2018) 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(2):605–614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4554-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Heffron WM, Hunnicutt JL, Xerogeanes JW, Woolf SK, Slone HS (2019) Systematic review of publications regarding quadriceps tendon autograft use in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil 1(1):e93–e99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2019.09.001

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Herbort M, Michel P, Raschke MJ, Vogel N, Schulze M, Zoll A, Fink C, Petersen W, Domnick C (2017) Should the ipsilateral hamstrings be used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the case of medial collateral ligament insufficiency? Biomechanical investigation regarding dynamic stabilization of the medial compartment by the hamstring muscles. Am J Sports Med 45(4):819–825. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546516677728

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Griffin LY, Albohm MJ, Arendt EA, Bahr R, Beynnon BD, Demaio M, Dick RW, Engebretsen L, Garrett WE Jr, Hannafin JA, Hewett TE, Huston LJ, Ireland ML, Johnson RJ, Lephart S, Mandelbaum BR, Mann BJ, Marks PH, Marshall SW, Myklebust G, Noyes FR, Powers C, Shields C Jr, Shultz SJ, Silvers H, Slauterbeck J, Taylor DC, Teitz CC, Wojtys EM, Yu B (2005) Understanding and preventing noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injuries: a review of the Hunt Valley II meeting. Am J Sports Med 34(9):1512–1532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546506286866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546516650666

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vilchez-Cavazos F, Dávila-Martínez A, Garza-Castro S, Simental-Mendía M, Garay-Mendoza D, Tamez-Mata Y, Peña-Martínez V, Acosta-Olivo C (2020) Anterior cruciate ligament injuries treated with quadriceps tendon autograft versus hamstring autograft: a randomized controlled trial. Cir Cir 88(1):76–81. https://doi.org/10.24875/ciru.19001001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sofu H, Sahin V, Gürsu S, Yıldırım T, Issın A, Ordueri M (2013) Use of quadriceps tendon versus hamstring tendon autograft for arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparative analysis of clinical results. Eklem Hastalik Cerrahisi 24(3):139–143. https://doi.org/10.5606/ehc.2013.31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Johnston PT, Feller JA, McClelland JA, Webster KE (2021) Strength deficits and flexion range of motion following primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction differ between quadriceps and hamstring autografts. J Isakos 6(2):88–93. https://doi.org/10.1136/jisakos-2020-000481

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Todor A, Nistor DV, Caterev S (2019) Clinical outcomes after ACL reconstruction with free quadriceps tendon autograft versus hamstring tendons autograft. A retrospective study with a minimal follow-up two years. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 53(3):180–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aott.2019.03.004

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Martin-Alguacil JL, Arroyo-Morales M, Martín-Gomez JL, Monje-Cabrera IM, Abellán-Guillén JF, Esparza-Ros F, Lozano ML, Cantarero-Villanueva I (2018) Strength recovery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with quadriceps tendon versus hamstring tendon autografts in soccer players: a randomized controlled trial. Knee 25(4):704–714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knee.2018.03.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gokeler A, Welling W, Benjaminse A, Lemmink K, Seil R, Zaffagnini S (2017) A critical analysis of limb symmetry indices of hop tests in athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a case control study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 103(6):947–951. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2017.02.015

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Järvelä T, Kannus P, Latvala K, Järvinen M (2002) Simple measurements in assessing muscle performance after an ACL reconstruction. Int J Sports Med 23(3):196–201. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2002-23171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fulkerson JP, McKeon BP, Donahue BJ, Tarinelli DJ (1998) The central quadriceps tendon as a versatile graft alternative in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: techniques and recent observations. Tech Orthop 13(4):367–374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Henry BM, Tomaszewski KA, Pękala PA, Graves MJ, Pękala JR, Sanna B, Mizia E (2018) Oblique incisions in hamstring tendon harvesting reduce iatrogenic injuries to the infrapatellar branch of the saphenous nerve. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(4):1197–1203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4590-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Zeng C, Lei G, Gao S, Luo W (2013) Methods and devices for graft fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010730

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Ochiai S, Hagino T, Senga S, Yamashita T, Oda K, Haro H (2017) Injury to infrapatellar branch of saphenous nerve in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using vertical skin incision for hamstring harvesting: risk factors and the influence of treatment outcome. J Orthop Surg Res 12(1):101. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-017-0596-x

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Sheean AJ, Musahl V, Slone HS, Xerogeanes JW, Milinkovic D, Fink C, Hoser C (2018) Quadriceps tendon autograft for arthroscopic knee ligament reconstruction: use it now, use it often. Br J Sports Med 52(11):698–701. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2017-098769

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Heijne A, Werner S (2010) A 2-year follow-up of rehabilitation after ACL reconstruction using patellar tendon or hamstring tendon grafts: a prospective randomised outcome study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18(6):805–813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-009-0961-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Dauty M, Tortellier L, Rochcongar P (2005) Isokinetic and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstrings or patella tendon graft: analysis of literature. Int J Sports Med 26(7):599–606. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-821342

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Xergia SA, McClelland JA, Kvist J, Vasiliadis HS, Georgoulis AD (2011) The influence of graft choice on isokinetic muscle strength 4–24 months after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(5):768–780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-010-1357-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Fischer F, Fink C, Herbst E, Hoser C, Hepperger C, Blank C, Gföller P (2018) Higher hamstring-to-quadriceps isokinetic strength ratio during the first post-operative months in patients with quadriceps tendon compared to hamstring tendon graft following ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(2):418–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-017-4522-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Horstmann H, Petri M, Tegtbur U, Felmet G, Krettek C, Jagodzinski M (2021) Quadriceps and hamstring tendon autografts in ACL reconstruction yield comparably good results in a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-021-03862-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Withrow TJ, Huston LJ, Wojtys EM, Ashton-Miller JA (2008) Effect of varying hamstring tension on anterior cruciate ligament strain during in vitro impulsive knee flexion and compression loading. J Bone Jt Surg Am 90(4):815–823. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.F.01352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Johnston PT, McClelland JA, Feller JA, Webster KE (2021) Knee muscle strength after quadriceps tendon autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 29(9):2918–2933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06311-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lind M, Nielsen TG, Soerensen OG, Mygind-Klavsen B, Faunø P (2020) Quadriceps tendon grafts does not cause patients to have inferior subjective outcome after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction than do hamstring grafts: a 2-year prospective randomised controlled trial. Br J Sports Med 54(3):183–187. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-101000

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Yang XG, Wang F, He X, Feng JT, Hu YC, Zhang H, Yang L, Hua K (2020) Network meta-analysis of knee outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with various types of tendon grafts. Int Orthop 44(2):365–380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-019-04417-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Turker Sahinkaya for his help with the strength measurement tests.

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Istanbul Bakirkoy Training and Research Hospital, Tevfik Saglam St. Number 11, 34147, Bakirkoy/Istanbul, Turkey

    Neset Tang

  2. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Istanbul Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Murat Eren & Yusuf Ozturkmen

  3. Joondalup Orthopaedic Group, Joondalup, WA, Australia

    Tahsin Gurpinar

Authors
  1. Neset Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Murat Eren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tahsin Gurpinar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yusuf Ozturkmen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

NT Contribution: study design, manuscript preparation; ME Contribution: performed measurements, study design; TG Contribution: critical revision; YO Contribution: manuscript preparation.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Neset Tang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants as well as the used registry were by the ethical standards of the institutional review board (IRB) of the Istanbul Training And Research Hospital with decision number 1335, at 07-06-2018 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.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tang, N., Eren, M., Gurpinar, T. et al. A prospective randomized controlled study of hamstring and bone-free quadriceps tendons autografts in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 34, 293–301 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-023-03636-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-023-03636-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation