These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Hamstring autograft versus soft-tissue allograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
    Author: Cvetanovich GL, Mascarenhas R, Saccomanno MF, Verma NN, Cole BJ, Bush-Joseph CA, Bach BR.
    Journal: Arthroscopy; 2014 Dec; 30(12):1616-24. PubMed ID: 25108904.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with hamstring autograft versus soft-tissue allograft by systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic review of randomized controlled studies comparing hamstring autograft with soft-tissue allograft in ACL reconstruction was performed. Studies were identified by strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Descriptive statistics were reported. Where possible, the data were pooled and a meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark). Dichotomous data were reported as risk ratios, whereas continuous data were reported as standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was assessed by use of I(2) for each meta-analysis. Study methodologic quality was analyzed with the Modified Coleman Methodology Score and Jadad scale. RESULTS: Five studies with 504 combined patients (251 autograft and 253 allograft; 374 male and 130 female patients) with a mean age of 29.9 ± 2.2 years were included. The allografts used were fresh-frozen hamstring, irradiated hamstring, mixture of fresh-frozen and cryopreserved hamstring, fresh-frozen tibialis anterior, and fresh-frozen Achilles tendon grafts without bone blocks. The mean follow-up period was 47.4 ± 26.9 months, with a mean follow-up rate of 83.3% ± 8.6%. Two studies found a longer operative time with autograft than with allograft (77.1 ± 2.0 minutes v 59.9 ± 0.9 minutes, P = .008). Meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences between autografts and allografts for any outcome measures (P > .05 for all tests). One study found significantly greater laxity for irradiated allograft than for autograft. The methodologic quality of the 5 studies was poor, with a mean Modified Coleman Methodology Score of 54.4 ± 6.9 and mean Jadad score of 1.6 ± 1.5. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of this systematic review and meta-analysis of 5 randomized controlled trials, there is no statistically significant difference in outcome between patients undergoing ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft and those undergoing ACL reconstruction with soft-tissue allograft. These results may not extrapolate to younger patient populations. The methodology of the available randomized controlled trials comparing hamstring autograft and soft-tissue allograft is poor. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review of Level I and II studies.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]