Download PDF
J Knee Surg
DOI: 10.1055/a-2451-6685
Original Article

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Allograft Reconstruction in Females Can Produce Outcomes Comparable to Those of Autografts in Male Counterparts

Sung Bae Park
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea
,
Yong Seuk Lee
1   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea
› Author Affiliations Funding This research received no external funding.
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

There are unique anatomical and geometric risk factors that contribute to higher injury rates of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in women. Allografts are an important alternative option for female patients.

Patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction were retrospectively evaluated. The case group comprised female patients with ACL allograft reconstruction, and the control group comprised male patients with ACL reconstruction. Functional and clinical evaluations were based on the pre- and postoperative Cybex test, Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective and objective measurement criteria, and Tegner Activity Scale questionnaires. Radiological comparisons were performed using the femorotibial angle (FTA), posterior tibial slope (PTS), and intercondylar notch width (INW). The roof inclination angle (RIA) was assessed using magnetic resonance imaging.

The two groups (female [44] and male [88]) had an average follow-up period of 57.9 ± 19.3 months and average ages of 36.5 ± 10.9 and 35.2 ± 11.7 years, respectively. Functional and clinical outcomes showed no differences between the groups, except that the return to the preinjury activity level was higher in the female group (95% vs. 77%, p < 0.001). The female group showed larger FTA and PTS and smaller INW and RIA than those of the male group (p < 0.001, 0.008, <0.001, and 0.035, respectively).

Female ACL allograft reconstruction showed comparable outcomes to those of their male counterparts, and the return to preinjury activity levels was significantly higher in women. However, women showed lower activity levels and were more vulnerable to geometric risk factors than their male counterparts.

Keywords

anterior cruciate ligament - reconstruction - female - allograft - geometric risk factor


Publication History

Received: 20 April 2024

Accepted: 23 October 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
24 October 2024

Article published online:
28 November 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Sutton KM, Bullock JM. Anterior cruciate ligament rupture: differences between males and females. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2013; 21 (01) 41-50
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Lowenstein NA, Haber DB, Ostergaard PJ, Collins JE, Matzkin EG. All-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using quadrupled semitendinosus: comparable 2-year outcomes in male and female patients. Arthroscopy 2021; 37 (10) 3140-3148
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Grawe BM, Williams PN, Burge A. et al. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autologous hamstring: can preoperative magnetic resonance imaging accurately predict graft diameter?. Orthop J Sports Med 2016; 4 (05) 2325967116646360
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Snaebjörnsson T, Hamrin Senorski E, Ayeni OR. et al. Graft diameter as a predictor for revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and KOOS and EQ-5D values: a cohort study from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Register based on 2240 patients. Am J Sports Med 2017; 45 (09) 2092-2097
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Spragg L, Chen J, Mirzayan R, Love R, Maletis G. The effect of autologous hamstring graft diameter on the likelihood for revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 2016; 44 (06) 1475-1481
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Devana SK, Solorzano C, Nwachukwu B, Jones KJ. Disparities in ACL reconstruction: the influence of gender and race on incidence, treatment, and outcomes. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 2022; 15 (01) 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Hulet C, Sonnery-Cottet B, Stevenson C. et al. The use of allograft tendons in primary ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2019; 27 (06) 1754-1770
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Tisherman R, Wilson K, Horvath A, Byrne K, De Groot J, Musahl V. Allograft for knee ligament surgery: an American perspective. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2019; 27 (06) 1882-1890
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Zeng C, Gao SG, Li H. et al. Autograft versus allograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and systematic review of overlapping systematic reviews. Arthroscopy 2016; 32 (01) 153-63.e18
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Kyung HS. Graft considerations for successful anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Relat Res 2019; 31 (01) 1
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Kim S-G, Kim S-H, Kim J-G, Jang KM, Lim HC, Bae JH. Hamstring autograft maturation is superior to tibialis allograft following anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018; 26 (04) 1281-1287
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Bottoni CR, Smith EL, Shaha J. et al. Autograft versus allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective, randomized clinical study with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 2015; 43 (10) 2501-2509
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Kvist J. Rehabilitation following anterior cruciate ligament injury: current recommendations for sports participation. Sports Med 2004; 34 (04) 269-280
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Kvist J, Ek A, Sporrstedt K, Good L. Fear of re-injury: a hindrance for returning to sports after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2005; 13 (05) 393-397
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Tan SH, Lau BP, Khin LW, Lingaraj K. The importance of patient sex in the outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med 2016; 44 (01) 242-254
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Czuppon S, Racette BA, Klein SE, Harris-Hayes M. Variables associated with return to sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med 2014; 48 (05) 356-364
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Vyas S, van Eck CF, Vyas N, Fu FH, Otsuka NY. Increased medial tibial slope in teenage pediatric population with open physes and anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011; 19 (03) 372-377
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Hamdan M, Haddad B, Isleem U. et al. Use of magnetic resonance imaging to determine laterality of meniscal size in healthy volunteers. PLoS One 2020; 15 (01) e0228040
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Tanksley JA, Werner BC, Conte EJ. et al. ACL roof impingement revisited: does the independent femoral drilling technique avoid roof impingement with anteriorly placed tibial tunnels?. Orthop J Sports Med 2017; 5 (05) 2325967117704152
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Kim JE, Won S, Jaffar MSA, Lee JI, Kim TW, Lee YS. How does geometric change after open-wedge high tibial osteotomy affect anterior cruciate ligament status?. Knee 2020; 27 (03) 940-948
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Park YG, Ha CW, Park YB. et al. Is it worth to perform initial non-operative treatment for patients with acute ACL injury?: a prospective cohort prognostic study. Knee Surg Relat Res 2021; 33 (01) 11
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Weber AE, Delos D, Oltean HN. et al. Tibial and femoral tunnel changes after ACL reconstruction: a prospective 2-year longitudinal MRI study. Am J Sports Med 2015; 43 (05) 1147-1156
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Won SH, Lee BI, Park SY. et al. Outcome differences of remnant-preserving versus non-preserving methods in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis with subgroup analysis. Knee Surg Relat Res 2020; 32 (01) 7
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Ahn JH, Lee YS, Ha HC. Comparison of revision surgery with primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and outcome of revision surgery between different graft materials. Am J Sports Med 2008; 36 (10) 1889-1895
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Mariscalco MW, Flanigan DC, Mitchell J. et al. The influence of hamstring autograft size on patient-reported outcomes and risk of revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Cohort Study. Arthroscopy 2013; 29 (12) 1948-1953
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Svensson M, Sernert N, Ejerhed L, Karlsson J, Kartus JT. A prospective comparison of bone-patellar tendon-bone and hamstring grafts for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in female patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2006; 14 (03) 278-286
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Pantano KJ, White SC, Gilchrist LA, Leddy J. Differences in peak knee valgus angles between individuals with high and low Q-angles during a single limb squat. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2005; 20 (09) 966-972
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Otsuki S, Nakajima M, Okamoto Y. et al. Correlation between varus knee malalignment and patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016; 24 (01) 176-181
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Liu Z, Jiang J, Yi Q. et al. An increased posterior tibial slope is associated with a higher risk of graft failure following ACL reconstruction: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022; 30 (07) 2377-2387
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Ireland ML, Ballantyne BT, Little K, McClay IS. A radiographic analysis of the relationship between the size and shape of the intercondylar notch and anterior cruciate ligament injury. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2001; 9 (04) 200-205
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Guler O, Mahırogulları M, Mutlu S, Cercı MH, Seker A, Cakmak S. Graft position in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: anteromedial versus transtibial technique. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2016; 136 (11) 1571-1580
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Ahn JH, Jeong HJ, Ko CS, Ko TS, Kim JH. Three-dimensional reconstruction computed tomography evaluation of tunnel location during single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparison of transtibial and 2-incision tibial tunnel-independent techniques. Clin Orthop Surg 2013; 5 (01) 26-35
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar