Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Hamstring Autograft: A Matched Cohort Comparison of the All-Inside and Complete Tibial Tunnel Techniques
- PMID: 30671490
- PMCID: PMC6327334
- DOI: 10.1177/2325967118820297
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Hamstring Autograft: A Matched Cohort Comparison of the All-Inside and Complete Tibial Tunnel Techniques
Abstract
Background: Surgical reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is one of the most common orthopaedic procedures, with an estimated 100,000 to 175,000 procedures performed annually. Recently, the all-inside reconstruction technique has come into favor and is theorized to be superior to the complete tibial tunnel technique.
Purpose: To compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for hamstring autograft ACL reconstruction (ACLR) performed with an all-inside versus a complete tibial tunnel technique.
Study design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
Methods: Patients who underwent hamstring autograft ACLR via either an all-inside approach (femoral and tibial sockets) or a complete tibial tunnel approach (femoral socket and full-length, transtibial tunnel) at a single institution between July 2011 and July 2015 were reviewed. Demographic information, preoperative comorbidities, surgical details, physical examination findings, and follow-up outcomes were extracted from the medical record. Physical examination data included pivot-shift, Lachman, and range of motion examinations, whereas PROs included the Tegner activity scale, Lysholm score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score at a minimum of 2 years after surgery. Return to sport and risk factors for failure were analyzed.
Results: A total of 82 patients (mean ± SD age, 25.8 ± 10.2 years) who underwent all-inside reconstruction (median PRO follow-up, 30.1 months; range, 24.7-72.9 months) and 54 patients (mean ± SD age, 21.1 ± 7.3 years) who underwent complete tibial tunnel reconstruction (median PRO follow-up, 25.8 months; range, 23.9-74.5 months) met the inclusion criteria. PRO scores at latest follow-up were comparable between the all-inside versus the complete tibial tunnel groups (Lysholm score, 93.8 vs 94.4, P = .621; IKDC score, 93.5 vs 93.3, P = .497; Tegner activity score, 6.4 vs 6.8, P = .048). Complications (including graft failure) were experienced by 20% of patients in the all-inside group compared with 24% in the complete tibial tunnel group (P = .530). Graft failure before the final follow-up was experienced by 10% of patients in the all-inside group compared with 19% in the complete tibial tunnel group (P = .200). Mean return to sport was 12.5 months in the all-inside group versus 9.9 months in the complete tibial tunnel group (P = .028).
Conclusion: All-inside and complete tibial tunnel hamstring autograft ACLR resulted in excellent physical examination findings and PROs at minimum 2-year follow-up. Both techniques successfully restored knee stability and patient function.
Keywords: anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction; ACL; all-inside; complete tibial tunnel.
Conflict of interest statement
One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: B.A.L. receives royalties from Arthrex; is a paid consultant for Arthrex and Smith & Nephew; and receives research support from Arthrex, Biomet, Smith & Nephew, and Stryker. D.L.D. receives research support from Arthrex and is a member of the NBA/GE Strategic Advisory Board, and her spouse has stock/stock options in and receives royalties from Tenex Health and Sonex Health. C.L.C. has received educational support from Arthrex and Zimmer Biomet and hospitality payments from Arthrex. A.J.K. receives research support from Aesculap/B. Braun and the Arthritis Foundation; receives royalties from Arthrex; and is a paid consultant for Arthrex, Vericel, DePuy Orthopaedics, and the Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation. M.J.S. receives royalties from Arthrex, is a paid consultant for Arthrex, receives research support from Stryker, and has received hospitality payments from Gemini Medical. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.
Figures


Similar articles
-
Hamstring Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using an All-Inside Technique With and Without Independent Suture Tape Reinforcement.Arthroscopy. 2021 Feb;37(2):609-616. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.09.002. Epub 2020 Nov 2. Arthroscopy. 2021. PMID: 33144236 Free PMC article.
-
Outcomes of retro-drilled all-inside tibial tunnel vs complete tibial tunnel techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction-a comparative study.Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2022 Apr;32(3):523-532. doi: 10.1007/s00590-021-03011-2. Epub 2021 May 24. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2022. PMID: 34028623
-
All-inside versus complete tibial tunnel techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.J Orthop Surg Res. 2023 Feb 21;18(1):127. doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-03613-y. J Orthop Surg Res. 2023. PMID: 36810091 Free PMC article.
-
Irradiated Hamstring Tendon Allograft Versus Autograft for Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Midterm Clinical Outcomes.Am J Sports Med. 2016 Oct;44(10):2579-2588. doi: 10.1177/0363546516655333. Epub 2016 Jul 27. Am J Sports Med. 2016. PMID: 27466222 Clinical Trial.
-
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Outcomes for Quadriceps Tendon Autograft Versus Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone and Hamstring-Tendon Autografts.Am J Sports Med. 2019 Dec;47(14):3531-3540. doi: 10.1177/0363546518825340. Epub 2019 Feb 21. Am J Sports Med. 2019. PMID: 30790526
Cited by
-
Randomized controlled trial of all-inside and standard single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with functional, MRI-based graft maturity and patient-reported outcome measures.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Mar 26;23(1):289. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05231-x. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022. PMID: 35337306 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Technique for All-Inside Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Quadrupled Semitendinosus and Gracilis Autograft.Arthrosc Tech. 2023 Jun 12;12(7):e1083-e1089. doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2023.02.046. eCollection 2023 Jul. Arthrosc Tech. 2023. PMID: 37533919 Free PMC article.
-
Isometric Knee Muscle Strength and Patient-Reported Measures Five Years after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Comparison of Single versus Dual Autograft Hamstring Tendon Harvesting.J Clin Med. 2022 Sep 26;11(19):5682. doi: 10.3390/jcm11195682. J Clin Med. 2022. PMID: 36233550 Free PMC article.
-
All-Inside Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Internal Brace With Recycling Suture.Arthrosc Tech. 2021 Oct 6;10(11):e2429-e2434. doi: 10.1016/j.eats.2021.07.022. eCollection 2021 Nov. Arthrosc Tech. 2021. PMID: 34868844 Free PMC article.
-
Anterior cruciate ligament repair using dynamic intraligamentary stabilization provides a similarly successful outcome as all-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a faster psychological recovery in moderately active patients.Jt Dis Relat Surg. 2022;33(2):406-413. doi: 10.52312/jdrs.2022.631. Epub 2022 Jul 6. Jt Dis Relat Surg. 2022. PMID: 35852201 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Astur DC, Cachoeira CM, da Silva Vieira T, Debieux P, Kaleka CC, Cohen M. Increased incidence of anterior cruciate ligament revision surgery in paediatric versus adult population. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(5):1362–1366. - PubMed
-
- Benea H, d’Astorg H, Klouche S, Bauer T, Tomoaia G, Hardy P. Pain evaluation after all-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and short term functional results of a prospective randomized study. Knee. 2014;21(1):102–106. - PubMed
-
- Blackman AJ, Stuart MJ. All-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Knee Surg. 2014;27(5):347–352. - PubMed
-
- Briggs KK, Steadman JR, Hay CJ, Hines SL. Lysholm score and Tegner activity level in individuals with normal knees. Am J Sports Med. 2009;37(5):898–901. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous