LAUSR

PurposeGraft choice for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is crucial, however the optimal graft source remains a topic of controversy. The purpose of this study is to compare subjective and functional patient-reported outcomes (PRO) after single-bundle ACL reconstruction using quadriceps tendon (QT) or hamstring tendon (HT) autografts for single-bundle ACL reconstruction. We hypothesize that there is no difference in patient-reported functional outcomes after ACL reconstruction using either HT- or QT autograft.MethodsAll data were extracted from a prospectively collected ACL registry. A total of 80 patients with at least 2-year follow-up were included in this study. A total of 40 patients with primary ACL reconstruction using a QT autograft harvested via a minimally invasive technique were matched by sex, age and pre-injury Tegner and Lysholm score to 40 patients who received HT autografts. Subjective and functional PRO scores including Lysholm score, Tegner activity level and visual analogue scale for pain were obtained at 6, 12 and 24 months after index surgery.ResultsNo significant difference between the QT and the HT group was seen at any follow-up in regard to any of the PRO scores for function or pain. 24 months post-surgery the mean Tegner activity score of the HT group was significantly (p = 0.04) lower compared to the pre-injury status. At final follow-up, 27 patients (67.5%) in the QT group and 32 patients (80.0%) in the HT returned to their pre-injury activity level (n.s.). A total of 37 patients (92.5%) of the QT cohort and 35 patients (87.5%) of the HT cohort reported “good” or “excellent” results according to the Lysholm score (n.s.). “No pain” or “slight pain” during severe exertion was reported by 33 patients (82.5%) with QT autograft and 28 patients (82.4%) with HT autograft (n.s.).ConclusionThere is no significant difference between PRO 2 years post-operative using either QT or HT autografts. Both QT and HT grafts show acceptable and comparable PRO scores making the QT a reliable graft alternative to HT for primary ACL reconstruction.Level of evidenceIII.