↓ Skip to main content

Increased knee laxity with hamstring tendon autograft compared to patellar tendon autograft: a cohort study of 5462 patients with primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Overview of attention for article published in Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
Title
Increased knee laxity with hamstring tendon autograft compared to patellar tendon autograft: a cohort study of 5462 patients with primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00167-018-5029-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Riccardo Cristiani, Vasileios Sarakatsianos, Björn Engström, Kristian Samuelsson, Magnus Forssblad, Anders Stålman

Abstract

To compare anterior knee laxity and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) performed with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and hamstring tendon (HT) autografts and, moreover, to study any correlation between postoperative anterior knee laxity and PROMs. Patients who underwent primary ACLR at Capio Artro Clinic, Stockholm, Sweden, from January 2000 to October 2015, were identified in our local database. Instrumented laxity measurements and PROMs were reviewed. The KT-1000 arthrometer, with an anterior tibial load of 134-N, was used to evaluate knee laxity preoperatively and at the 6-month follow-up. The Lysholm score was collected preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) was collected preoperatively and at the 1-year follow-up. A total of 5462 primary ACLRs, 692 BPTBs and 4770 HT autografts were included in the study. All the patients showed a significant reduction in knee laxity from preoperatively to postoperatively (BPTB group: from 3.8 ± 2.6 to 1.2 ± 2.1 mm; HT group: from 3.6 ± 3.1 to 1.8 ± 2.2 mm; P < 0.001 for both). The HT group showed a significantly increased postoperative knee laxity compared with the BPTB group (1.8 ± 2.2 vs 1.2 ± 2.1 mm; P < 0.001). The mean anterior tibial translation (ATT) reduction from preoperative to postoperative was significantly larger for the BPTB graft compared with the HT graft (2.7 ± 2.2 vs 1.7 ± 2.6 mm; P < 0.001). A significantly higher rate of "surgical failures", defined as a postoperative side-to-side (STS) difference > 5 mm, was found in the HT group compared with the BPTB group at follow-up (4.3 vs 2.4%; P < 0.001). A significantly larger improvement was found in the HT group compared with the BPTB group for the KOOS Pain (9.5 vs 8.0; P = 0.02), Activities of Daily Living (7.2 vs 5.7; P = 0.006), Sports (24.2 vs 15.3; P < 0.001) and Quality of Life (25.8 vs 22.1; P = 0.001) subscales. No significant difference regarding the mean improvement in the Lysholm knee score was found between the two grafts (BPTB group: 14.5, HT group: 14.0; n.s.). No correlation between postoperative anterior knee laxity and PROMs was found in either graft group. Primary ACLR performed with HT autograft resulted in greater postoperative anterior knee laxity and significantly more surgical failures (STS > 5 mm) compared with BPTB autograft. The BPTB autograft showed a larger anterior knee laxity reduction (ATT reduction) in conjunction with primary ACLR. The HT autograft led to a significantly larger improvement in four of five KOOS subscales from preoperatively to the 1-year follow-up, compared with BPTB autograft. There was no association between postoperative anterior knee laxity and PROMs for either graft. The findings of the present study provide clinicians with valuable information regarding differences in knee laxity and subjective knee function between BPTB and HT autograft after primary ACLR. The use of BPTB autograft should be considered for patients with high knee stability demands. Retrospective cohort study, Level III.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 112 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 13%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Researcher 8 7%
Other 7 6%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 40 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 10%
Sports and Recreations 8 7%
Engineering 3 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 47 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 February 2023.
All research outputs
#13,816,685
of 23,415,749 outputs
Outputs from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#1,472
of 2,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,796
of 330,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#29
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,415,749 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,710 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,065 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.