BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with hamstring autografts less than 8.5 mm in diameter is associated with worse patient-reported outcome scores and increased risk of revision surgery compared with reconstructions performed with larger grafts. One proposed solution to small autograft harvest is to create a hybrid graft by augmenting autografts with allograft tissue to increase graft diameter. PURPOSE: To compare hybrid autograft/allograft ACL reconstruction to autograft ACL reconstruction, specifically analyzing the patient-reported outcome scores and the risk of revision surgery at 2 years postoperative. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: From the years 2002 to 2009, a total of 34 patients were identified from a prospectively collected database as having undergone hybrid ACL reconstruction. Twenty-seven of 34 (79.4%) patients had a 2-year follow-up. These 27 patients were matched by age (within 1 year) and sex to 27 patients who underwent hamstring autograft ACL reconstruction during the same period. At the 2-year mark, revision surgery risk and patient-reported outcome scores were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The mean age for the hybrid and matched groups (±SD) was 20.9 ± 7.0 years. Both the hybrid and control groups had 17 males and 10 females. There was no significant difference in preoperative patient-reported outcome scores, meniscus tears, or cartilage lesions between the 2 groups. Graft size was larger in the hybrid group (9.5 ± 0.6 mm) than in the autograft group (8.4 ± 0.9 mm) (P < .001). At 2 years postoperative, patient-reported outcome scores were similar between the hybrid and autograft groups. Revision surgery was required in 5 (18.5%) patients who underwent hybrid reconstruction compared with 2 (7.4%) of those who underwent autograft reconstruction (P = .26). CONCLUSION: Patients who undergo ACL reconstruction with hybrid hamstring grafts and hamstring autografts report similar patient-reported outcome scores at 2 years postoperative but may be at increased risk for revision ACL reconstruction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Darnley et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: