AJSM
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
First published on July 11, 2005, doi:10.1177/0363546504274202
This version was published on October 1, 2005
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
33/10/1505    most recent
0363546504274202v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (8)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Barrett, G.
Right arrow Articles by White, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Barrett, G.
Right arrow Articles by White, M.
Related Collections
Right arrow Reconstruction
Right arrow Operative
Right arrow Graft fixation
The American Journal of Sports Medicine 33:1505-1512 (2005)
© 2005 American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Patients Older Than 40 Years

Allograft Versus Autograft Patellar Tendon

Gene Barrett, MD*, David Stokes, MD and Miranda White

From the Mississippi Sports Medicine and Orthopaedic Center, Jackson, Mississippi

* Address correspondence to Gene Barrett, MD, Mississippi Sports Medicine and Orthopaedic Center,1325 East Fortification Street, Jackson, MS 39236-6870 (e-mail: gbarrett{at}msmoc.com).

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is the recommended treatment for patients of all ages who are involved in sports and have symptoms of knee instability.

Hypothesis: In patients older than 40 years, allograft reconstruction will have better subjective and objective results than autograft reconstruction, proving allograft to be a better graft source for this patient population.

Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods: The authors identified 63 patients meeting the criteria for this study, including 38 patients in the allograft group and 25 patients in the autograft group. All patients were older than 40 years and had at least 2 years’ follow-up. Objective parameters included preinjury and postoperative Tegner activity rating scale and Lysholm scores, range of motion, thigh circumference differences, side-to-side difference at maximum manual force in anterior displacement by KT-1000 arthrometer, and clinical examination for Lachman and pivot-shift tests. Using a 15-point visual analog scale, the authors performed subjective evaluations.

Results: Both groups’ Tegner activity rating scale scores returned to preoperative levels. Visual analog scales and range of motion data were similar for both groups. KT-1000 arthrometer data showed a mean maximum difference of 1.46 mm for the allograft group and 0.10 mm for the autograft group (P = .398). Three patients in the allograft group showed greater than 5 mm difference, compared with none in the autograft group. There was 1 clinical failure in the allograft group. In the allograft group, 57% of patients had returned to sports by 6 months versus 25% of patients in the autograft group (P = .005), increasing to 71% and 43%, respectively, at final follow-up (P = .127).

Conclusion: Allograft bone–patellar tendon–bone advantages include quicker return to sporting activities; disadvantages include increased laxity and higher incidence of failure. The advantage of autograft bone–patellar tendon–bone is that it appears to be a tighter graft. The authors found that allograft was not a superior graft source in this patient population, leading them to offer both options.

Key Words: anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) • allograft • autograft




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
NEJMHome page
K. P. Spindler and R. W. Wright
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tear
N. Engl. J. Med., November 13, 2008; 359(20): 2135 - 2142.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J Sports MedHome page
M. Y. H. Soon, A. Hassan, J. H. P. Hui, J. C. H. Goh, and E. H. Lee
An Analysis of Soft Tissue Allograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in a Rabbit Model: A Short-Term Study of the Use of Mesenchymal Stem Cells to Enhance Tendon Osteointegration
Am. J. Sports Med., June 1, 2007; 35(6): 962 - 971.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine.