Abstract
The optimal method of tibial fixation when using a hamstring tendon autograft in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is unclear. This study aimed to compare the risk of revision ACL reconstruction between suspensory and interference devices on the tibial side.
Prospective data on primary ACL reconstructions recorded in the New Zealand ACL Registry between April 2014 and December 2019 were analyzed. Only patients with a hamstring tendon autograft fixed with a suspensory device on the femoral side were included. The rate of revision ACL reconstruction was compared between suspensory and interference devices on the tibial side. Univariate Chi-Square test and multivariate Cox regression was performed to compute hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) with adjustment for age, gender, time-to-surgery, activity at the time of injury, number of graft strands and graft diameter.
6145 cases were analyzed, of which 59.6% were fixed with a suspensory device on the tibial side (n = 3662), 17.6% fixed with an interference screw with a sheath (n = 1079) and 22.8% fixed with an interference screw without a sheath (n = 1404). When compared to suspensory devices (revision rate = 3.4%), a higher risk of revision was observed when using an interference screw with a sheath (revision rate = 6.2%, adjusted HR = 2.05, 95% CI 1.20 – 3.52, p = 0.009) and without a sheath (revision rate = 4.6%, adjusted HR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.02 – 3.23, p = 0.044). The number of graft strands and a graft diameter of ≥8 mm did not influence the risk of revision.
When reconstructing the ACL with a hamstring tendon autograft, the use of an interference screw, with or without a sheath, on the tibial side has a higher risk of revision when compared to a suspensory device.
