title: Arthroscopic reconstruction of the posterior cruciate ligament: a comparison of quadriceps tendon autograft and quadruple hamstring tendon graft.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Considerable controversies remain on the graft choice and fixation methods in the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to compare, at minimal 2-year follow-up, the outcomes of PCL reconstruction between using quadriceps tendon autograft and using quadruple hamstring tendon autograft.
  
  
  METHODS
  Case series.
  
  
  METHODS
  All patients received only PCL reconstruction without combined severe associated posterolateral instability. From 1996 to 1998, there were 24 patients who had a quadriceps tendon autograft, and 30 patients with hamstring tendon autograft. Twenty-two of the quadriceps tendon group and 27 of the hamstring tendon autograft group with 2 more years of complete follow-up were included for final analyses. Clinical assessments consisted of Lysholm knee scores, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, thigh muscle girth and strength, and radiographic evaluation.
  
  
  RESULTS
  On the Lysholm knee rating, 86% of patients showed good or excellent results in the quadriceps tendon group and so did 89% of patients in the hamstring tendon group. Fifty-nine percent of the quadriceps tendon group and 56% of the hamstring tendon group revealed a 3- to 5-mm ligament laxity. Two patients with quadriceps tendon grafts and 4 patients with hamstring tendon grafts revealed grade II laxity. The IKDC rating showed no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of activity level, ligament laxity, and final rating. In the thigh girth side-to-side difference, 82% of the quadriceps tendon group and 78% of the hamstring tendon group had less than a 10-mm difference.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Comparable satisfactory results between the 2 surgical groups were shown at a minimal 2 years follow-up. We suggested that both grafts could afford good ligament reconstruction likelihood and that they are reasonably acceptable graft choices for PCL reconstruction.
authors.affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan. afachen@doctor.com
authors.forename: Chih-Hwa
authors.initials: CH
authors.lastname: Chen
authors.forename: Wen-Jer
authors.initials: WJ
authors.lastname: Chen
authors.forename: Chun-Hsiung
authors.initials: CH
authors.lastname: Shih
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001182:Arthroscopy; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D016119:Posterior Cruciate Ligament / Q000293:injuries / Q000601:surgery*; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular; D013710:Tendons / Q000637:transplantation*; D014182:Transplantation, Autologous; D016896:Treatment Outcome