BACKGROUND: In orthopaedics, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions are among the most common surgical interventions. Two methods are preferably used: autografts from the hamstring tendon (HT) or patella tendon (PT). The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare these two methods when returning to sports.
METHODS: Eleven studies were included based on a literature search conducted in PubMed. The primary outcome was return to preinjury sport level in athletes. Post-operative results such as the Lysholm score, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, the Tegner Activity Score and KT-1000 arthrometry and autograft re-rupture rates were analysed as secondary outcomes.
RESULTS: The analysis showed no significant difference in return to preinjury sports level at a two-year follow-up between patients operated with hamstring or patella autograft. Considering the secondary outcomes, no significant differences were recorded in Lysholm score, IKDC score or re-rupture rate. The Tegner Activity Scale demonstrated a significantly higher activity level in the PT group than in the HT group (OR 0.79, p = 0.003). At the two-year follow-up, the KT-1000 arthrometer analysis also showed a significant difference in laxity, which was higher for the HT autografts (OR -0.31, p = 0.02).
CONCLUSIONS: This study showed no significant differences between hamstring and patella autografts. Even so, the choice of method when operated for ACL rupture remains crucial for the individual and should be a weighted decision made jointly by the patient and the physician.

The hamstring tendon (HT) autograft is currently the most widely utilised autograft option for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, recent studies endorse the peroneus longus tendon (PLT) autograft as a viable alternative. To evaluate this, we systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy of PLT against HT autografts. Our search encompassed Cochrane, Embase, OVID, PubMed, and Scopus databases for RCTs comparing outcomes of PLT and HT autografts in ACL reconstruction. Primary outcomes included Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, while secondary outcomes involved American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores, graft diameters and donor-site complications. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration) and heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. 683 patients from 6 RCTs were included, with 338 (49.5%) patients treated with PLT autografts. Follow-up ranged from 12 to 30 months. Despite lower preoperative Lysholm scores in the PLT group, no significant differences were observed at 6 and 12 months. Although preoperative and 6-month IKDC scores were lower in the PLT group, no significant differences were found at 12 and 24 months. AOFAS scores showed no significant preoperative difference, but slightly lower scores were noted in the PLT group at 12 or 24 months. There was no significant difference in graft diameter, while donor-site complications were fewer in the PLT group. In summary, the PLT autograft is a promising and non-inferior alternative to the HT autograft, demonstrating equivalent outcomes in patient-reported knee and ankle metrics, comparable graft diameters and fewer donor-site complications.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of semitendinosus tendon (ST) and gracilis tendon (GT) cross-sectional area (CSA) on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and anthropometric characteristics in preoperative estimation of graft diameter in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with four-strand hamstring autografts.
METHODS: Three databases were searched on 29 August 2023. The authors adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and R-AMSTAR (Revised Assessment of Multiple Systematic Review) guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data on demographics, anthropometric characteristics, imaging techniques, tendon CSA, correlation coefficients, sensitivities, specificities, regression models and cutoffs for predicting intraoperative graft diameters above 8 mm were recorded.
RESULTS: Forty-six studies comprising 4140 patients were included. Twelve of 19 (63.2%) studies reporting on ST + GT CSA found a moderate to very high correlation with intraoperative graft diameter. Five of 10 (50%) and one of seven (14.3%) studies reporting on ST CSA and GT CSA, respectively, found a moderate to high correlation with intraoperative graft diameter. Cutoffs of ST + GT CSA for predicting graft diameters above 8 mm ranged from 15.8 to 31.2 mm2. Nine of 35 (25.7%) studies that reported on height found a moderate to very high correlation with graft diameter. Seven of 33 (21.2%) studies reporting on weight found a moderate correlation with graft diameter.
CONCLUSIONS: Of the MRI parameters assessed, ST + GT CSA was the most reliable predictor of graft diameter. However, cutoffs, sensitivities, and specificities for predicting diameters above 8 mm were highly variable. Anthropometric characteristics in general were less predictive of graft diameter than MRI parameters. This information can be used by clinicians to predict patients at risk for ACLR failure due to insufficient graft size.
METHODS: Level IV.

OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcomes, knee stability and complications, failure, and revision rates after anterior cruciate ligament repair (ACLr) with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) versus anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with hamstring autograft for primary ACL ruptures at short and mid-term follow-up.
METHODS: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review of PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus was performed. Studies that evaluated patients undergoing ACLr with DIS or ACLR with hamstring autograft were considered for inclusion. Studies were excluded if patients were affected by concomitant meniscal, ligamentous, or chondral injuries needing surgical treatment, because of their potential confounding effect on postoperative outcomes. The Risk of Bias-2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. The quality of available evidence was rated according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation recommendations. The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (ID: CRD42023394558).
RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials comparing the outcomes of ACLr with DIS versus ACLR with hamstring autograft met the inclusion criteria. No major differences in terms of patient-reported outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee subjective form, Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, visual analog scale satisfaction) or rates of complications, revisions, and failures were found in included studies at all time points. Repair showed greater International Knee Documentation Committee subjective form scores at 5 years in one study, whereas ACLR displayed significantly increased knee stability at 6 months and 5 years in 2 different studies, although the clinical relevance of these differences is doubtful.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that ACLr with DIS is not inferior to ACLR with hamstring autograft in terms of rates of clinical outcomes, knee stability, risk of failure, complications, and revision surgery. Therefore, ACLr with DIS may be a viable alternative to ACLR with hamstring autograft in selected patients.
METHODS: Level I, systematic review of Level I studies.

BACKGROUND: Whether there is a difference in harvesting the semitendinosus tendon alone (S) or in combination with the gracilis tendon (SG) for the recovery of knee flexor strength after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction remains inconclusive. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the recovery of knee flexor strength based on the autograft composition, S or SG autograft at 6, 12, and ≥ 24 months after ACL reconstruction.
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed encompassing the Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PEDRo and AMED databases from inception to January 2023. Inclusion criteria were human clinical trials published in English, comprised of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), longitudinal cohort-, cross-sectional and case-control studies that compared knee flexor strength recovery between S and SG autografts in patients undergoing primary ACL reconstruction. Isokinetic peak torques were summarized for angular velocities of 60°/s, 180°/s, and across all angular velocities, assessed at 6, 12, and ≥ 24 months after ACL reconstruction. A random-effects model was used with standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals. Risk of bias was assessed with the RoBANS for non-randomized studies and the Cochrane RoB 2 tool for RCTs. Certainty of evidence was appraised using the GRADE working group methodology.
RESULTS: Among the 1,227 patients from the 15 included studies, 604 patients received treatment with S autograft (49%), and 623 received SG autograft (51%). Patients treated with S autograft displayed lesser strength deficits at 6 months across all angular velocities d = -0.25, (95% CI -0.40; -0.10, p = 0.001). Beyond 6 months after ACL reconstruction, no significant difference was observed between autograft compositions.
CONCLUSIONS: The harvest of S autograft for ACL reconstruction yields superior knee flexor strength recovery compared to SG autograft 6 months after ACL reconstruction, irrespective of angular velocity at isokinetic testing. However, the clinical significance of the observed difference in knee flexor strength between autograft compositions at 6 months is questionable, given the very low certainty of evidence and small effect size. There was no significant difference in knee flexor strength recovery between autograft compositions beyond 6 months after ACL reconstruction.
BACKGROUND: CRD42022286773.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to compare the patient-reported outcomes and return to sports of the conservative and surgical treatment of distal hamstring tendon injuries.
METHODS: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, two reviewers searched PubMed, Scopus and Virtual Health Library databases in January 2023. Clinical studies evaluating conservative or surgical management outcomes of distal hamstring tendon injuries were considered eligible for this systematic review if predefined criteria were fulfilled: (1) published in English or Spanish; (2) evaluated any of the following: patient-reported outcomes, return-to-sports rate (RTS-R) or return-to-sports time (RTS-T). Data were presented in tables using absolute values from individual studies and derived pooled percentages.
RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included for 67 patients and 68 distal hamstring tendon injuries. Initially, 39 patients (58.2%) underwent surgical treatment, whereas 28 (41.8%) were treated conservatively. Among conservative treatment patients, 15 failed and had to be operated on (53.6%), all with distal semitendinosus tendon injuries. Anchor fixation was the technique of choice in 20 lesions (36.4%), tenodesis in 16 (29.1%), tenectomy in 14 (25.5%) and sutures were preferred in five (9%). Thirteen out of 28 patients (46.4%) undergoing initial conservative treatment returned to sports at a mean of 3.6 months (range 1 week to 12 months), in contrast to surgical treatment, in which 36 out of 39 patients (92.3%) returned at a mean of 4.2 months (range 6 weeks to 12 months). Additionally, 14 of 15 patients (93.3%) converted to surgical treatment after failed conservative treatment returned to sports at a mean of 7.6 months after injury.
CONCLUSIONS: Initial surgical treatment of distal hamstring tendon injuries yields a high RTS-R (92.3%) at a mean of 4.2 months. Furthermore, 15 out of 28 patients (53.6%) initially treated conservatively had to be operated on, delaying the RTS-T (mean 7.6 months after injury) without affecting their RTS-R.
METHODS: IV.

UNASSIGNED: New techniques are being developed to decrease the failure rate of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) grafts and prevent revision surgery. One such technique involves high-strength suture tape (ST), also referred to as internal bracing. Recent literature has highlighted the use of ST for ACL reconstruction, but no study has compared ST augmentation between graft types.
UNASSIGNED: To compare the use of ST augmentation for ACL reconstruction based on the type of graft used (ie, bone-patellar tendon-bone [BPTB], quadriceps, hamstring).
UNASSIGNED: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 5.
UNASSIGNED: An online search of multiple databases was performed according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and was completed April 2022 to identify studies related to ST augmentation of ACL grafts.
UNASSIGNED: Of 926 studies identified, 10 met inclusion criteria. Five studies (50%) used hamstring tendon (HT), 3 (30%) used quadriceps tendon (QT), 1 (10%) used BPTB, and 1 (10%) used both HT and QT grafts. HT autografts augmented with ST had decreased dynamic and peak elongation (15%-56%), increased load to failure, and increased initial and final dynamic stiffness compared with controls. There was no significant difference in postoperative physical examination findings (range of motion, Lachman, pivot shift), except that ST-augmented grafts had significantly less laxity after surgery compared with HT alone (0.8 vs 1.9 mm; P < .05). QT allografts with ST augmentation showed increased graft strength. Human QT autograft studies showed higher Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score scores compared with controls. BPTB allografts with ST augmentation had decreased cyclic displacement by 31% (P = .015) and increased load (758 ± 128 N; P < .001) and stiffness (156 ± 23 N/mm; P = .003) compared with nonaugmented groups. The complication rate was low or showed no increase in the ST augmentation groups compared with control groups.
UNASSIGNED: HT, QT, and BPTB grafts augmented with ST demonstrate an effective method for ACL reconstruction. All graft types with ST augmentation showed no evidence of clinical disadvantage, with some studies indicating significant biomechanical or clinical advantages compared with conventional ACL reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: A chronic Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) is defined as an ATR that has been left untreated for more than four weeks following rupture. This systematic review aims to summarize the outcomes of chronic ATR treated using either a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap or semitendinosus tendon graft.
METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in three databases (PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane), for studies describing outcomes after surgical treatment of chronic ATR using gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps or semitendinosus tendon grafts with more than 10 patients included. The studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias using the Methodological Items used to assess risk of bias in Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS).
RESULTS: Out of the 818 studies identified with the initial search, a total of 36 studies with 763 individual patients were included in this systematic review. Gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap was used in 21 and semitendinosus tendon graft was used in 13 of the studies. The mean (SD) postoperative Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS) for patients treated with a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap was 83 (14) points and the mean (SD) American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS) was 96 (1.7) points compared with ATRS 88 (6.9) points and AOFAS 92 (5.6) points for patients treated with a semitendinosus tendon graft. The included studies generally had low-quality according to MINORS, with a median of 8 (range 2-13) for all studies.
CONCLUSIONS: Both gastrocnemius aponeurosis flaps and semitendinosus tendon grafts give acceptable results with minimal complications and are valid methods for treating chronic ATR. The main difference is more wound healing complications in patients treated with a gastrocnemius aponeurosis flap and more sural nerve injuries in patients treated with a semitendinosus grafts. The current literature on the subject is of mainly low quality and the absence of a patient-related outcome measure validated for chronic ATR makes comparisons between studies difficult.
METHODS: Level IV.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the available literature to better understand the objective and patient-reported outcomes using peroneus longus tendon (PLT) autograft compared with more commonly used autografts, such as the quadrupled hamstring tendons (HT), in patients undergoing primary for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).
METHODS: A comprehensive search of published literature in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Ovid, and EMBASE databases was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria included patients undergoing ACLR with PLT autograft, inclusion of patient-recorded outcome measures, and availability in English language. Publications that included only biomechanical analysis or ACLR with use of allograft or combination grafts were excluded.
RESULTS: A total of 16 studies (Level of Evidence range: I-IV) met inclusion criteria, with follow-up ranging from 3 months to 5 years. In the available case series, patient-reported outcomes ranged from Lysholm = 80.7 to 95.1, International Knee Documentation Committee 78.1 to 95.7. In prospective cohorts and randomized controlled trials, PLT performance was comparable with HT autografts (PLT/HT: Lysholm = 88.3-95.1/86.5-94.9, International Knee Documentation Committee = 78.2-92.5/87.4-93.4). The majority of PLT grafts diameters were equal or greater than HT counterparts with a mean of >8 mm (PLT/HT: 7.0-9.0 mm/7.65-8.5 mm). There was minimal donor-site morbidity associated with PLT harvest.
CONCLUSIONS: Although limitations exist within the available literature, existing evidence suggests that PLT autograft routinely produces adequately sized grafts with comparable early outcomes to HT autograft and low risk of donor-site morbidity. However, the PLT autograft is yet to demonstrate superiority to any of the more-traditional autograft selections.
METHODS: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of primary or revision ACL reconstruction (ACLR) after contralateral hamstring autografts versus ipsilateral hamstring autograft harvest.
METHODS: Three databases (MEDLINE, PubMed and EMBASE) were searched from inception to April 27th, 2023 for studies investigating contralateral hamstring autografts in primary or revision ACLR. The authors adhered to the PRISMA and R-AMSTAR guidelines as well as the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data on demographics, strength measures, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and rates of positive Lachman test, positive pivot-shift test and graft rupture were extracted. PROMs included Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Tegner scores.
RESULTS: Nine studies comprising 371 patients were included in this review. In primary ACLR, there were no significant differences between contralateral and ipsilateral groups in isokinetic hamstring torque in the non-ACLR limb or isokinetic quadriceps torque in both limbs when tested at 60, 90, 120 or 180 degrees/second. Isokinetic hamstring torque in the non-ACLR limb was significantly weaker in the contralateral group at six months for primary ACLR; however, these deficits did not persist. There were no significant differences in postoperative median Tegner scores and Lysholm scores between contralateral and ipsilateral groups in primary ACLR. There were no significant differences in postoperative median Tegner, mean Lysholm and IKDC scores between groups in revision ACLR. There were no significant differences in positive Lachman, positive pivot-shift and rupture rates in primary ACLR between groups. Rates of positive Lachman and pivot-shift were slightly higher in the contralateral than ipsilateral group for revision ACLR.
CONCLUSIONS: Contralateral hamstring autografts results in comparable muscle strength to ipsilateral hamstring autografts, with the exception of weaker hamstring strengths in the early postoperative period. Patient-reported outcome measures were similar between the two groups across both primary and revision ACLR, with rates of instability and failure being similar between groups for primary ACLR. Contralateral hamstring grafts do not provide additional benefit when compared to ipsilateral options for either primary or revision ACLR, and should be used only in select circumstances including insufficient ipsilateral hamstring grafts or situations where quadriceps or patella autografts are not optimal.
METHODS: Level IV.