Patellofemoral functional outcome of gracilis sparing compared to gracilis sacrificing ACL reconstruction. (December 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Phatama, Krisna Yuarno; Mustamsir, Edi; Jaya, Aryc Oktarian; Pradana, Ananto Satya; Putra, Domy Pradana; Hidayat, Mohamad
• Is Part Of: Annals of medicine and surgery. Volume 84(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-12
• Subjects: ACL Rupture -- Gracilis sparing and sacrificing -- Hamstring autograft -- Kujala score; Surgery -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; General Surgery -- Periodicals; Education, Medical -- Periodicals; Periodicals; 617
• DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104940
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2049-0801

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: The hamstring is the most popular autograft used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Despite its excellent outcome, donor site morbidity is also irritating. Patellofemoral problems are reported to be one of the side effects after hamstring autograft harvesting, suggested to be due to both gracilis & semitendinosus sacrificing. Some experts propose retaining gracilis to decrease patellofemoral problems. The all-inside technique is an advantageous ACLR technique that can preserve the gracilis muscle while reducing muscle strength loss of affected limbs and the risk of knee joint instability under rotational load. This study aims to compare the patellofemoral functional outcome of both gracilis sparing and sacrificing using a validated Kujala score three months after ACLR. Methods: There was total of 20 subjects who underwent ACLR between December 2021 and May 2022 and met the inclusion criteria. They were then grouped into gracilis sparing group (n = 10) and gracilis sacrificing group (n = 10). Follow up assessment (Kujala Score) was conducted during phase II of the rehabilitation program. The assessed variables were surgery technique, time of surgery-to-evaluation, and Kujala Score. Result: There were no significant differences in Kujala Score between gracilis sparing and gracilis sacrificing groups (p = 0.809). There was a strong positive correlation between the time of surgery-to-evaluation and Kujala Score in each group (p = 0.942 and p = 0.910, respectively). Conclusion: There are no differences in patellofemoral functional outcomes between patients who undergo gracilis sparing and gracilis sacrificing ACLR with good scores of Kujala, which means both gracilis sparing and sacrificing show no harm to the patellofemoral after the ACLR. Highlights: Gracilis is useful for treating patellofemoral problems. Both gracilis sparing and sacrificing show no harm to patellofemoral after ACLR. No differences between gracilis in patellofemoral functional outcome with Kujala Score.