Isokinetic Muscle Strength and Knee Function in Anatomical Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Hamstring Autografts: A Prospective Randomized Comparative Study Between Suspensory and Expandable Femoral Fixation in Male Patients
Cureus. 2022 Dec 13;14(12):e32482.doi: 10.7759/cureus.32482. eCollection 2022 Dec.
Isokinetic Muscle Strength and Knee Function in Anatomical Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Hamstring Autografts: A Prospective Randomized Comparative Study Between Suspensory and Expandable Femoral Fixation in Male Patients
Andreas Panagopoulos 1, Vasileios Giannatos 1, Giorgos Moros 2, Dimitrios Mylonas 1, Antonis Kouzelis 1, John Gliatis 1
Affiliations expand
PMID: 36644094 PMCID: PMC9836015 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.32482
Abstract
Background Clinical performance, anterior knee stability, and isokinetic strength after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with hamstring autografts are mainly influenced by graft selection, femoral tunnel preparation, and type of femoral fixation. Expandable femoral fixation devices are expected to provide a stronger initial fixation with circular graft compression, a blind-ended tunnel in the femur with less enlargement, and a theoretical double-band ACL equivalent through graft rotation. This study aimed to evaluate isokinetic strength and functional capacity after ACL reconstruction with hamstring tendons using two different anatomical femoral fixation techniques (expandable vs fixed-looped button). Methodology A total of 48 male patients with ACL deficient knees were randomized to two different femoral fixation groups, namely, the expandable (AperFix) and the standard cortical (Button) group. The primary outcome measures were isokinetic hamstrings and quadriceps strength capabilities and the hamstrings/quadriceps ratio at 60 degrees/second (°/s) and 180°/s using a Cybex before and at three, six, nine, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Secondary measurements were anteroposterior knee stability at two years (using KT-1000 arthrometer) and the functional outcome using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC 2000) form, the Tegner activity scale, and the Lysholm knee score. Data were compared using a paired t-test and analysis of variance, with a p < 0.05 level of significance. Results Most patients regained the 60°/s quadriceps strength between three and 12 months (62.5% for the Button group vs. 50% for the AperFix group), as well as the 180°/s strength (79.17% vs 70.83%); however, at the 24-month evaluation, seven (29.17%) patients in the Button group and five (20.83%) in the AperFix group had significant deficits. The 60°/s flexor strength was regained in the first six months in 19 (79.17%) patients in the Button group and in 16 (66.7%) patients in the AperFix group, whereas the percentages for the 180°/s strength were 79.17% and 75%, respectively. Beyond the 24-month evaluation, only three (12.5%) patients in the Button group and four (16.67%) in the AperFix group had significant flexor deficits. Regarding the H/Q ratio, at 60°/s, the mean recovery time was six and 7.5 months for the Button and AperFix groups, respectively, whereas 15 and 12 patients, respectively, did not recover during the two-year duration. At 180°/s, a mean recovery time of six months was needed for the button group, and nine patients did not recover two years later. For the AperFix group, nine months were needed, and 12 patients did not recover in two years. Clinical performance and anterior knee stability showed no statistically significant differences between groups. Conclusions Although there were no significant differences in clinical performance, knee stability, and isokinetic strength testing between expandable and cortical button femoral fixation groups, return to play was doubtful at two years postoperatively.
