Allografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Chapter 73


Allografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction






Important Points



• Potential advantages of use of allograft tissue compared with autograft include the following:



• Potential disadvantages of allograft use include the following:



• In ACL reconstruction, graft selection should be done on an individual basis; however, in certain populations of patients, allograft may be preferable over autograft, whereas in others the opposite may be true.79 Patients in whom allograft may be preferred include the following:



• Those patients in whom allograft is less desirable include the following:




Clinical and Surgical Pearls



• Patients should be allowed to make informed decisions on graft choice after a full discussion of risks and benefits with the treating surgeon.


• Have informed consent from the patient to use an allograft.


• Know your allograft supplier’s track record and tissue-processing techniques, including use of irradiation and proprietary cleansing techniques.


• Have a second allograft available should something go wrong with the original graft (label error, tissue quality, technical error, contamination), or discuss use of the patient’s own tissue if something is wrong with the allograft.


• Prepare anatomic sockets with an independent drilling technique. Use of the described footprint method ensures an anatomic reconstruction that is not vulnerable to variable patient anatomy or errant referencing of other intra-articular landmarks. Nonanatomic ACL reconstructions are at increased risk for failure independent of autograft or allograft selection.


• Oscillating saws and rongeurs are best for removal of excess bone and sizing of the bone plug.


• Achilles allograft may be favorable owing to bone-to-bone fixation and a large cross-sectional area and favorable time-zero biomechanical properties.


• Allografts may be reasonable options for ACL reconstruction in patients age 40 years and older, particularly those with existing patellofemoral pain and/or extensor mechanism disorders.



Clinical and Surgical Pitfalls



• It is critical to recognize and treat associated malalignment and ligamentous injury, including medial collateral ligament (MCL), lateral collateral ligament (LCL), and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injury. Failure to recognize and treat these conditions will predispose the allograft ACL reconstruction to failure.


• Both Achilles and BTB allografts require careful preparation of the bone plug to avoid fracture; bone crimpers should not be used.


• With bone–patellar tendon–bone allografts, length and graft-tunnel mismatch can be an issue, and tibial tunnel length should be adjusted accordingly.


• Allograft tissue incorporates more slowly than autograft, and bone plug nonunion has been reported.10,11 A delayed return to play may help minimize the risk of graft failure secondary to inadequate host incorporation.


The use of allografts has enjoyed considerable clinical success in many soft tissue reconstructive procedures, including anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, one of the most common orthopedic procedures performed today. With more than 250,000 new ACL ruptures reportedly each year,12,13 estimates indicate that 300,000 ACL reconstructions are performed annually, with approximately 240,000 (80%) performed with autograft tissue and 60,000 (20%) with allograft tissue.7 Rationales for increased use of allograft tissue include more effective sterilization procedures,14 organized collection and distribution of tissue, and increased confidence in the overall stability of allografts.1517


The orthopedic surgeon has a number of graft options for reconstructive surgery of the ACL. Bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) and hamstring autografts have historically been used for ACL reconstructive surgery, with numerous peer-reviewed studies reporting favorable clinical outcomes.1821 However, the use of allograft tissue for ACL reconstruction has increased.1820 These grafts avoid potential donor site morbidity associated with hamstring or patellar tendon graft harvest, including donor site pain,1,2 patellar fracture,3 patellar tendon rupture,4,5 saphenous nerve injury,6 and residual extensor mechanism or hamstring weakness.1,2224 Currently available allograft tissue includes BPTB; Achilles, hamstring, or tibialis tendon; and tensor fascia lata (Fig. 73-1). The increasing demand for allograft tissue in ACL reconstruction is attributed to potentially decreased donor site morbidity and postoperative pain, decreased operating room time, increasing availability from tissue banks, and improved cosmesis. However, potential disadvantages include cost,25,26 availability, reliability of vendors, slower graft incorporation, the possibility of disease transmission and/or immunologic response,7 and a potentially increased risk of failure among younger athletes.8



Ideal ACL grafts have the following characteristics27:




Preoperative Considerations




History


As always, a thorough history should be obtained. This should include age, prior activity level, mechanism of injury, symptoms of preinjury or postinjury instability and pain, and history of previous or concomitant knee injuries. Patient expectations, including desired activity level, are critical in helping to guide selection of autograft or allograft reconstruction. A history of immunocompromise or previous graft failure is also important and may influence graft selection.




Physical Examination



General Examination




• Assessment of standing alignment is critical for every patient. Significant varus alignment increases the risk of failure after ACL reconstruction and may warrant realignment with associated osteotomy.


• Gait should be examined to assess for associated varus thrust. The presence of a thrust often indicates associated lateral collateral and posterolateral (PL) corner complex insufficiency, and a failure to recognize this will increase the risk of failure of the ACL reconstruction.


• Effusion and hemarthrosis may be present.


• Preexisting scars may provide insight into previous surgical procedures and/or graft source.


• Range of motion. It is critical to achieve resolution of effusion and restoration of motion before ACL reconstructive surgery to minimize risk of postoperative stiffness and arthrofibrosis. A mechanical block to full extension or flexion despite resolution of an effusion is often indicative of an associated bucket-handle meniscal tear.28


• Joint line tenderness is often indicative of an associated meniscal injury, or secondary to the typical bone contusion pattern of a pivot-shift event.



Specific Tests




• All tests should be performed on the involved and the contralateral limbs, because side-to-side differences are most important in the detection of subtle differences in stability and ligamentous integrity.


• Anterior drawer and Lachman tests are critical for assessment of anterior translational instability. Relative differences between limbs are more important than absolute measurements of translation to indicate ACL insufficiency.


• Anteromedial (AM) rotatory stability to assess the integrity of the medial collateral and posterior oblique ligaments. Occult posteromedial corner injury can increase the risk of ACL reconstruction failure.2931


• Anterolateral rotatory instability and “dial” testing to assess integrity of the lateral collateral and PL corner complex. Missed PL corner injury is a well-recognized cause of failure after ACL reconstruction.2931


• Varus and valgus examination of the knee in full extension and 30 degrees of flexion to assess collateral ligament integrity. Associated collateral ligament injury may warrant delayed surgical intervention or operative repair and must be addressed with ACL injury to avoid failure of the reconstruction.


• Pivot-shift testing with axial load and valgus stress is critical to assess functional instability and rotational instability secondary to ACL insufficiency. Note that the pivot-shift test result may be negative in the setting of an associated bucket-handle tear of the meniscus or medial collateral ligament (MCL) insufficiency that prevents valgus loading of the knee. Presence of fat lobules in aspirated fluid may be confirmatory of associated fracture or osteochondral trauma.



Imaging



Radiographs (Fig. 73-2)





• Standing, long-leg radiographs are essential for assessment of mechanical alignment of the extremities. Asymmetric varus alignment must be addressed to avoid failure of the ACL reconstruction.


• Anteroposterior, lateral, and sunrise views of the knee should be obtained. Loose bodies, spine avulsion fractures, and occult plateau fractures may be identified. Segond fractures with lateral capsular avulsion fragments are pathognomonic of ACL injury but are not universally present with ACL injury. The presence of patella alta, patella baja, or tibial tubercle apophysitis may be a relative contraindication to autogenous patellar tendon graft selection.


• A flexion weight-bearing (Rosenberg) view should be obtained to assess for significant tibiofemoral joint space narrowing. The presence of significant osteoarthritic changes may be a relative contraindication to ACL reconstruction.



Magnetic Resonance Imaging


Magnetic resonance imaging has a high sensitivity (94.4%) and specificity (94.3%) for full-thickness tear9 (Fig. 73-3).






Indications and Contraindications


The approach to graft election for ACL reconstruction must be determined on an individual basis after a thorough review of the risks and benefits of autograft and allograft sources. Patients should make an informed decision about graft type used for ACL reconstruction. However, there are populations of patients in whom allograft may be preferable over autograft7,9:



Patients in whom allograft is less desirable include the following:




Surgical Technique



Allograft Selection


The surgeon has multiple options when it comes to choosing allograft tissue, including patellar tendon, hamstring, Achilles tendon, tibialis anterior tendon, and tensor fascia lata. These may be procured from one of the many tissue banks currently in practice. It has been reported that there are more than 80 tissue banks that are current members of the AATB, with at least 60 more banks that are not currently members.22 It is prudent for the surgeon to be knowledgeable about the soft tissue bank’s methods of procurement, sterilization, and preparation before using its allografts, because these factors can significantly affect a patient’s outcome.


Although the number of infections is likely underreported, allograft transplantation infection rates are very low; the reported incidence is less than 1% (0.0004% to 0.014%).33,34 Despite this low incidence, many surgeons continue to be concerned with the risk of allograft disease transmission.33 This phenomenon has been well documented35,36 with regard to transmission of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV), group A streptococcus, Clostridium species, and prions. In addition, many surgeons have concerns about regulatory practices and the biomechanical properties of tissue after sterilization.


Currently, all human cells or tissues intended for transplantation into a human recipient are regulated as HCT/P, or “human cell, tissue, and cellular and tissue-based product.”34,37 Any institution that recovers, processes, stores, or handles allograft tissue consequently not only must register with the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research33 of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but also is strongly encouraged to seek certification from the AATB’s voluntary accreditation program, which ensures that tissue banks that seek its certification follow strict guidelines for tissue processing. Because of past disease transmission, the FDA now mandates that all donor tissue be screened for HIV types 1 and 2, HBV, HCV, Treponema pallidum, and human transmissible spongiform encephalopathies with use of advanced nucleic acid testing (NAT) techniques.34 NAT sharply reduces the diagnostic window and excludes donors with high viremia.38 In addition, the AATB requires members to conduct NAT testing and provide negative Clostridium and Streptococcus pyogenes tissue culture results.34,37 Although accreditation by the AATB is not required, tissue banks are urged to seek certification. Lack of accreditation can be a warning to the surgeon about the quality of the allografts provided by the tissue bank.


After appropriate donor screening, including exhaustive reviews of medical and social histories for risk factors for infectious disease, allograft tissue must undergo processing to ensure that pathogens are not concomitantly transferred. It should be noted that the Current Good Tissue Practice does not necessarily mandate aseptic handling or sterilization before transplantation of donor tissue; however, tissue recovery is typically performed with use of aseptic technique, in a standard operating room setting.34,37 Tissue procured under these conditions is not necessarily sterile—contamination may still be introduced by health care workers or the donor’s endogenous flora.34


After procurement, specimens are sterilized. There is currently no single preferred sterilization process; however, the two main processes for sterilization are irradiation and proprietary chemical processing. The FDA maintains that biologic medical devices are acceptable if a sterility assurance level (SAL) of 10−3 (1 in 1000 chance that a living microbe exists) is attained. Human tissues may be considered sterile only if these specimens have an SAL of 10−6. However, allografts that have not been treated with gamma or electron-beam irradiation or ethylene oxide are not likely to be sterile.39 Irradiation of soft tissue allografts is a delicate balancing act. Gamma radiation sterilization is an effective technique33,40 that works by inducing excitation of molecules and ions for radical-induced chemical reactions, which subsequently leads to demise of pathogens. Although irradiation of 25 to 40 kGy can inactivate HIV and eliminate spores, the free-radical formation resulting from these doses has been shown to significantly alter the biomechanics of soft tissue grafts. Generation of free radicals distorts the integrity of the allograft tissue, which has been demonstrated in a number of studies showing decreasing allograft biomechanical integrity and enzyme resistance in irradiated tendons41,42 with increasing doses of irradiation (Table 73-1).4345 The underlying reasons for this poor biomechanical integrity are not yet well understood. Gamma irradiation above 20 to 25 kGy is now seldom used because of this concern.22


Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Sep 11, 2016 | Posted by in SPORT MEDICINE | Comments Off on Allografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access