Allograft Use Results in Higher Re-revision Rate for Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

32Citations
Citations of this article
69Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The literature on revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) outcomes is generally sparse, but previous studies have demonstrated that autograft use results in improved sports function and patient-reported outcome measures compared with allograft. However, knowledge is still lacking regarding the impact of graft type on rates of re-revision. Purpose: To investigate the clinical outcomes and failure rates of revision ACLRs performed with either allograft or autograft. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A search of the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Registry identified 1619 revision ACLRs: 1315 were autograft procedures and 221 were allograft procedures (type of graft was not identified for 83 procedures). Clinical outcomes after 1 year were reported via the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Tegner activity score, and an objective knee stability measurement that determined side-to-side differences in instrumented sagittal knee laxity. Failure was determined as re-revision. Outcomes for revision were provided for the full life of the registry, up to 10 years. Results: The re-revision rate was significantly higher for allograft compared with autograft (12.7% vs 5.4%; P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nissen, K. A., Eysturoy, N. H., Nielsen, T. G., & Lind, M. (2018). Allograft Use Results in Higher Re-revision Rate for Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine, 6(6). https://doi.org/10.1177/2325967118775381

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free