Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 19, 2025

Athymic Rat Model for Evaluation of Engineered Anterior Cruciate Ligament Grafts
Published on: March 26, 2015
Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with all-soft tissue quadriceps tendon versus quadriceps tendon with bone
Joshua C Setliff1, Ehab M Nazzal2, Nicholas P Drain2
1University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 3200 S Water Street, PittsburghPittsburgh, PA, 15203, USA. setliffjc@upmc.edu.
Purpose:
The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether there was a difference in clinical outcomes between patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR) with all-soft tissue quadriceps tendon (sQT) autograft versus QT with bone block (bQT).
Methods:
A retrospective cohort study of 708 patients who underwent QT ACLR was conducted. Primary ACLR patients with at least 1 year of follow-up were identified and those who received sQT were compared to those who received bQT. Data collection entailed patient demographics, surgical variables, patient reported outcomes (PROs), knee stability testing, and complications. The primary outcome of interest was International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, reported as mean score, pre- and postoperative difference, and number who met minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Secondary outcomes included Lachman and pivot shift grade, other patient reported outcomes (PROs), complication rates, and return to sport (RTS).
Results:
A total of 195 patients (147 sQT, 48 bQT) who underwent primary QT ACLR met criteria for analysis, with mean follow-up of 17.0 ± 7.9 months. No difference was detected between cohorts with respect to postoperative IKDC score (sQT: n = 120, 81.0 ± 18.9, bQT: n = 10, 80.9 ± 20.4, n.s.), proportion of patients who met MCID (sQT: 68/78 [87%], bQT: 6/7 [86%], n.s.), or results of stability testing. In the sQT cohort, 86% (106/123) of athletes achieved full RTS, compared to 85% (34/40) in the bQT cohort (n.s.). Time to RTS was less than a year in both cohorts (sQT: 10.5 ± 3.8 months [n = 106], bQT: 11.1 ± 3.9 months [n = 31], n.s.). Graft rupture occurred in 7 (5%) sQT patients and 3 (6%) bQT patients (n.s.), and all clinical failures were due to graft rupture (n.s.). No differences were detected for rates of postoperative complications.
Conclusion:
No differences in clinical outcomes were detected between patients who underwent primary ACLR with sQT autograft versus bQT autograft. Currently, the decision to employ sQT or bQT is largely determined by surgeon preference. This study demonstrates excellent outcomes with both preparations and supports the use of either graft type at the discretion of the treating surgeon.
Level Of Evidence:
III.
More Related Videos
08:30Surgical Retrieval, Isolation and In vitro Expansion of Human Anterior Cruciate Ligament-derived Cells for Tissue Engineering Applications
Published on: April 30, 2014
05:07Author Spotlight: Implementing the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Concept in Rehabilitation Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
Published on: March 1, 2024