This study compared the revision rates after autograft and allograft bone-patella tendon-bone anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. All bone-patella tendon-bone ACL reconstructions performed by a single surgeon between January 2000 and December 2006 were identified by retrospective chart review. Two hundred twenty-three patients met the inclusion criteria and 173 patients were available for follow-up. One hundred forty-two patients underwent bone-patella tendon-bone autograft reconstruction, and 31 patients underwent bone-patella tendon-bone allograft reconstruction. At a mean follow-up of 49 months (range, 11-91 months), revision rates were 0.7% (1/142) in the bone-patella tendon-bone autograft group versus 9.7% (3/31) in the bone-patella tendon-bone allograft group (P=.02). Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores of nonrevised (surviving) grafts in the bone-patella tendon-bone autograft group were 98.3 versus 95.2 in the bone-patella tendon-bone-allograft group (P=.0006). Tegner scores of nonrevised grafts in the bone-patella tendon-bone-autograft group were 6.2 vs 6.5 in the bone-patella tendon-bone-allograft group (P=.03). Fourteen of the 31 (45%) allografts were irradiated and all failures occurred in irradiated grafts. When irradiated grafts were excluded, no difference in revision rates was found. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with the use of bone-patella tendon-bone allografts is associated with a higher revision rate when compared to bone-patella tendon autograft reconstruction. In addition, when comparing surviving grafts, the subjective IKDC scores are higher in the autograft group. When irradiated grafts are excluded, no difference in revision rates was found. Surgeons should be aware of the higher revision rate associated with allograft ACL reconstruction when counseling patients on graft options.

Background:Several techniques are available to secure the graft to the patella during medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction. The biomechanical properties of these techniques remain unknown.Purpose:To compare the biomechanical properties of 3 MPFL patellar fixation techniques: bone tunnels (BT), PushLock anchors (PL), and tenodesis screws (TS).Study Design:Controlled laboratory study.Methods:Forty-five MPFL reconstructions were performed using 3 different reconstruction techniques (BT, PL, and TS). The specimens were randomly assigned, with 15 specimens in each of the 3 groups. Cyclic loading (500 cycles) and load-to-failure testing were performed. Gap formation after 100 and 500 cycles, ultimate load to failure, and stiffness were measured.Results:Six constructs failed during cyclic loading, 5 in the PL group (33%) and 1 in the TS group (6.7%). After 100 cycles, differences in gap formation were found between the PL and BT groups (4.48 vs 3.62 mm, P < .03) and between the PL and TS groups (4.48 vs 2.28 mm, P < .0001). After 500 cycles, differences in gap formation were found between the BT and TS groups (6.63 vs 4.16 mm, P < .002) and between the PL and TS groups (7.89 vs 4.16 mm, P < .005). The PL group was found to have a lower ultimate load to failure when compared with the BT group (161.4 vs 258.3 N, P = .019) and the TS group (161.4 vs 237.1 N, P = .009). Group differences in stiffness did not reach statistical significance among the 3 groups (PL, 33.72 N/mm; BT, 37.50 N/mm; TS, 43.00 N/mm).Conclusion:The TS and BT groups have more ideal biomechanical properties than the PL group, as demonstrated by less displacement during cyclic loading and a higher load to failure.Clinical Relevance:Fixation of the patellar limbs during MPFL reconstruction may be optimized with the use of TS or BT over a PL technique.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes of Prochondrix® novel thin, laser-etched osteochondral allograft on isolated articular cartilage defects. Methods: Eighteen patients with isolated, symptomatic, full-thickness articular cartilage lesions were treated with marrow stimulation followed by placement of a T-LE allograft. Demographic and intra-operative data was recorded as well as pre- and post-operative International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Short Form-36 (SF-36), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Tegner scores. Pre- and post-operative data was compared at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post operatively. Failures requiring reoperation were also recorded. Results: At a mean follow-up of 2.5 years (6–43 months), VAS decreased from 6.55 to 2.55 ( p = .02) and subjective IKDC scores increased from 37.61 to 59.65 ( p = .02). Statistically significant increases were also seen in KOOS Function-Sports and Recreational Activities (+26.04, p = .04) and KOOS QOL (+18.76, p = .007) as well as in SF-36 Physical Functioning (+25.20, p = .04), Energy/Fatigue (+16.50, p = .02), Social Functioning (+11.79, p = .04), and Bodily Pain (+25.18, p = .04). There were two failures requiring reoperation: one conversion to a patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA), and one graft dislodgement which required removal. Conclusion: Treatment of articular cartilage lesions of the knee with ProChondrix® has demonstrated sustained positive results out to a mean follow-up of two and a half years in this prospective case series with a low failure rate that required reoperation (2 patients) in this series. These results are comparable to the short-term results of other cartilage restoration procedures currently in use today. A meta-analysis of osteochondral allografting demonstrated a mean 86.7% survival rate at 5 years with significant improvements in clinical outcome scores reaching MCID values.