Posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for chronic lesions: clinical experience with hamstring versus ligament advanced reinforcement system as graft.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare clinical and laximetric results in chronic, isolated posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) rupture repairs, using either a hamstring graft or an artificial ligament (ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS®)).

METHODS

Sixteen patients presenting with an isolated unilateral PCL rupture were included in this retrospective study. Initially, eight underwent a PCL reconstruction using a hamstring tendon autograft (hamstring group), and over a later period, eight further patients underwent a reconstruction using an artificial ligament with a new procedure.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were male and one female, with an average age of 29.3 years. All patients were operated on within an average time of 18 months post-injury. Pre-operative posterior laxity was equivalent (p = 0.309), 18.25 mm on average for the hamstring group and 18.75 mm for the LARS group. With an average follow-up of 24 months, residual posterior laxity was significantly improved, decreasing from 18.25 to 7.37 mm for the hamstring group (p < 0.05) with a median at 7.5 mm and from 18.75 to 5.25 mm for the LARS group (p < 0.05) with a median at 5 mm. The improvement in laxity for the hamstring group was 60% and 71.5% for the LARS group. The LARS group compares favourably (p = 0.003 and 0.01). Tegner activity level improved significantly following ligamentoplasty, with no difference between the two groups (p = 0.4). Likewise, there was no significant difference in the Lysholm and IKDC scores between the two groups (p = 0.4).

CONCLUSION

The initial hypothesis of this study was proven correct. Nevertheless, a longer term study is necessary to assess the consequences of residual laxity in hamstring grafts and the long-term behaviour and tolerance of the LARS artificial ligament.