MARATTO

article · ALEXMED ePosters

COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES OF PRIMARY ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION USING QUADRICEPS TENDON VERSUS HAMSTRING TENDON AUTOGRAFTS

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is a popular orthopedic operation that requires careful graft selection. Several graft options are available, including hamstring tendon (HT), bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB), peroneus longus tendon (PLT) and quadriceps tendon (QT). Traditionally, BPTB and HT autografts have been the most common choices. BPTB is regarded as the gold standard, however it may result in postoperative discomfort and an increased risk of OA. Hamstring tendons are less predictable and may reduce knee flexion. HT repair fails at a higher rate than BPTB, particularly among young athletes. Newer techniques with decreased soft tissue dissection yield a more robust and stable graft with comparable outcomes to BPTB and HT autografts. Consequently, the QT is emerging as an effective graft option, and recent studies highlight the increase in popularity of the QT autograft.AIM:This study aimed to compare the functional results following primary ACL reconstruction using quadriceps tendon autograft and hamstring tendon autograft.PATIENTS AND METHODOLOGY:This was a prospective randomized clinical study. Forty patients were randomized to either the QT group (group 1: reconstruction was done for 20 patients with quadriceps tendon autograft) or the HT group (group 2: reconstruction was done for 20 patients with hamstring tendon autograft). Evaluation was done clinically using the 2000 subjective IKDC score and the objective IKDC grading system in the second week postoperatively, after 3 months, after 6 months, and at the end of the follow-up, which was minimally 12 months postoperatively.

Research topics

  • Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
  • Sports injuries and prevention

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.21608/alexpo.2025.374322.2131

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.