Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Low surgical routine increases revision rates after quadriceps tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Registry

  • KNEE
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

Recent registry data have demonstrated a higher revision rate of quadriceps tendon (QT) graft compared with hamstring tendon (HT) and patellar tendon (PT) grafts. Clinic routines could be an important factor for revision outcomes. The purpose of this study is to use the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Registry (DKRR) to compare revision rates in patients who have undergone ACLR with QT, HT and PT grafts related to individual clinic surgical routine.

Methods

Data on primary ACLRs entered in the DKRR from 2012 through 2019 were analysed since QT graft usage started in 2012. Revision rates for QT, HT and PT grafts were compared according to clinic activity (0–100 and > 100 procedures). Revision rates for the three autograft cohorts are presented, as well as adjusted revision hazard rates. Instrumented knee stability and pivot-shift tests were performed at a one-year follow-up.

Result

QT revision rate (6.4%) for low-activity clinics was higher than for high-activity clinics (2.9%) (p = 0.003). The adjusted revision hazard ratio for low-activity clinics was 2.3 (p = 0.01). QT autograft was associated with statistically significant, increased side-to-side laxity at follow-up (1.4 mm) compared with HT and PT autografts (1.0 mm) (p < 0.01), as well as an increased positive pivot-shift rate.

Conclusion

QT autografts for ACLR were associated with higher revision rates in clinics with lower than 100 procedures performed from 2012 to 2019. QT graft usage is not associated with a high revision rate when routinely performed. Learning curve is an important factor when introducing QT ACLR.

Level of evidence

Level III

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cavaignac E, Coulin B, Tscholl P, Fatmy NMN, Duthon V, Menetrey J (2017) Is Quadriceps tendon autograft a better choice than hamstring autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A comparative study with a mean follow-up of 3.6 years. Am J Sports Med 45(6):1326–1332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. DeAngelis JP, Fulkerson JP (2007) Quadriceps tendon–a reliable alternative for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Clin Sports Med 26(4):587–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Eysturoy NH, Nissen KA, Nielsen T, Lind M (2018) The influence of graft fixation methods on revision rates after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 46(3):524–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Fink C, Herbort M, Abermann E, Hoser C (2014) Minimally invasive harvest of a quadriceps tendon graft with or without a bone block. Arthroscopy Techniques 3(4):e509–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Geib TM, Shelton WR, Phelps RA, Clark L (2009) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using quadriceps tendon autograft: intermediate-term outcome. Arthroscopy 25(12):1408–1414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gifstad T, Foss OA, Engebretsen L, Lind M, Forssblad M, Albrektsen G, Drogset JO (2014) Lower risk of revision with patellar tendon autografts compared with hamstring autografts: a registry study based on 45,998 primary ACL reconstructions in Scandinavia. Am J Sports Med 42(10):2319–2328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Gorschewsky O, Klakow A, Putz A, Mahn H, Neumann W (2007) Clinical comparison of the autologous quadriceps tendon (BQT) and the autologous patella tendon (BPTB) for the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15(11):1284–1292

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Han HS, Seong SC, Lee S, Lee MC (2008) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: quadriceps versus patellar autograft. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466(1):198–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jakob RP, Staubli HU, Deland JT (1987) Grading the pivot shift. Objective tests with implications for treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 69(2):294–299

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lee JK, Lee S, Lee MC (2016) Outcomes of anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: bone-quadriceps tendon graft versus double-bundle hamstring tendon graft. Am J Sports Med 44(9):2323–2329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lind M, Menhert F, Pedersen AB (2009) The first results from the Danish ACL reconstruction registry: epidemiologic and 2 year follow-up results from 5,818 knee ligament reconstructions. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17(2):117–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lind M, Menhert F, Pedersen AB (2012) Incidence and outcome after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from the Danish registry for knee ligament reconstructions. Am J Sports Med 40(7):1551–1557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lind M, Nielsen TG, Soerensen OG, Mygind-Klavsen B, Fauno P (2020) Quadriceps tendon grafts does not cause patients to have inferior subjective outcome after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction than do hamstring grafts: a 2-year prospective randomised controlled trial. Br J Sports Med 54(3):183–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Lind M, Strauss MJ, Nielsen T, Engebretsen L (2020) Quadriceps tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is associated with high revision rates: results from the Danish Knee Ligament Registry. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(7):2163–2169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lund B, Nielsen T, Fauno P, Christiansen SE, Lind M (2014) Is quadriceps tendon a better graft choice than patellar tendon? A prospective randomized study. Arthroscopy 30(5):593–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Maletis GB, Inacio MC, Funahashi TT (2015) Risk factors associated with revision and contralateral anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions in the Kaiser Permanente ACLR registry. Am J Sports Med 43(3):641–647

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mouarbes D, Menetrey J, Marot V, Courtot L, Berard E, Cavaignac E (2019) 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 47(14):3531–3540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mulford JS, Hutchinson SE, Hang JR (2013) Outcomes for primary anterior cruciate reconstruction with the quadriceps autograft: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(8):1882–1888

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Rahr-Wagner L, Thillemann TM, Lind MC, Pedersen AB (2013) Validation of 14,500 operated knees registered in the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Register: registration completeness and validity of key variables. Clin Epidemiol 5:219–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rahr-Wagner L, Thillemann TM, Pedersen AB, Lind M (2014) Comparison of hamstring tendon and patellar tendon grafts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in a nationwide population-based cohort study: results from the danish registry of knee ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 42(2):278–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Rahr-Wagner L, Thillemann TM, Pedersen AB, Lind MC (2013) Increased risk of revision after anteromedial compared with transtibial drilling of the femoral tunnel during primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Register. Arthroscopy 29(1):98–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Roos EM, Toksvig-Larsen S (2003) Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)—validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Runer A, Wierer G, Herbst E, Hepperger C, Herbort M, Gfoller P, Hoser C, Fink C (2018) There is no difference between quadriceps- and hamstring tendon autografts in primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a 2-year patient-reported outcome study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(2):605–614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Slone HS, Ashford WB, Xerogeanes JW (2016) Minimally invasive quadriceps tendon harvest and graft preparation for all-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy Techniques 5(5):e1049–e1056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Slone HS, Romine SE, Premkumar A, Xerogeanes JW (2015) Quadriceps tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comprehensive review of current literature and systematic review of clinical results. Arthroscopy 31(3):541–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Tegner Y, Lysholm J (1985) Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 198:43–49

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The study was funded internally by the Dept of Orthopedics at Aarhus University Hospital.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aarhus University Hospital, Department of Orthopaedics, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, Aarhus N, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark

    Martin Lind & Torsten Nielsen

  2. Orthopedic Clinic, Oslo University Hospital and Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway

    Marc J. Strauss & Lars Engebretsen

Authors
  1. Martin Lind
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marc J. Strauss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Torsten Nielsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lars Engebretsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Lind.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors state no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

No written consent is necessary in Denmark for studies based on data from the National Board of Health-approved national healthcare registries. However, the study was approved by the Regional Centre for Clinical Quality Development and the National Data Protection Agency (Approval number 1-16-02-65-17).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lind, M., Strauss, M.J., Nielsen, T. et al. Low surgical routine increases revision rates after quadriceps tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Registry. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 29, 1880–1886 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06220-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06220-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation