Sports Knee Surgery ACL Graft Choice Dr Jonathan Mulford myorthopod.com.au 1

Who am I? 2

3

ACL Surgery What do you think of the LARS? 4

What Are you asking me? What is the best graft? What would you have? 5

Graft Choice Autograft – Patients own tissue Allograft – someone else's tissue Synthetic - Artificial 6

Which Graft Leo P – Hamstrings Merv C – Patella tendon Americans Allograft Koreans Quads Tendon Footy show says Synthetic Graft ???????? 7

Media LARS option: Fisher aims for fast return David Rodan back on training track two weeks after knee surgery Miracle op to melt down surgeons' phones Rodan surgery to become the norm Covell's career on knife's edge Moltzen plays it safe 8

WHICH GRAFT WOULD YOU HAVE? Autograft Allograft Synthetic 9

Lets look at some evidence 10

Allograft Allograft significantly lower normal stability rates than autograft Allograft abnormal stability rate 3 times greater than autograft. 11

Autograft 12

Hamstrings Good Things Bad Things 13

Hamstrings Pros Quick harvest Reliable Can use for double bundle Small incisions Early rehab not too bad. 14

Hamstring Graft Cons Subtle hamstring discomfort Graft gets weaker intially as revascularises Fixation to bone can takes longer than BTB Stretches a little more than BTB Graft size not predictable 15

Patella Tendon Good Things Bad Things 16

Patella Tendon Pros Bone heals to bone quickly Stiffer graft (doesn’t seem to stretch as much) No hamstring problems Better if larger heavier patients and collision sports ligament lax individuals Known Hamstring problems 17

BTB graft Cons Arguably anterior knee pain (Bone graft) Longer to harvest graft Larger incisions uncomfortable initially Risk of patella fracture and tendinopathy 18

Quads Tendon Good Things Bad Things 19

Quads Tendon Pros Cons Strong graft Good for revision graft May be useful for double bundle May have less morbidity then Patella and hamstrings Cons Quads weakness Anterior knee pain Not commonly used 20

Great What does the literature tell us. Remember there is a lot of poor literature. 21

Patella vs Hamstrings 22

23

What about Quads? Currently performing Systematic review. No difference to BTB Quads strength? / less anterior knee pain ? / 24

Patient Specific Approach Choose graft that matches the patients needs. Discuss the pros and cons of each graft. 25

Artificial Graft Have been used for over 30years Avoids the donor site morbidity, quicker recovery, cheat biology. Problem has been their durability – they have not matched autograft in this regard. 26

27

As a result Long rehab that Lion opts for LARS 11/5/2010 28

LARS What’s good? What’s bad? 29

History Artificial Grafts 1918 silk sutures – failed 3 months First graft 1973 - Proplast made of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) Results with this system yielded an average time to breakage of just over 1 year. 30

Classification of Synthetic Grafts Ligament Augmentation Devices (polypropylene, polyester) initial strength until revascularisation, stress shielding of autogenous tissue and prevented adequate strength. Total Prosthetics permanent replacement with no revascularisation. Excellent short-term results, long-term efficacy results were poor due to wear and ensuing rupture of the prosthesis. 31

CARBON FIBRE PROSTHETICS Began late 70s carbon wear particles coated with collagen and absorbable polymers Good Early results longer term - unacceptable stretching and complete rupture as major complications. 32

DACRON tightly woven polyester strips. Early results were good however by 4 years about 50% had failed due to stretching of the graft. 33

LEEDS-KEIO ARTIFICIAL LIGAMENT a polyester mesh intended as a scaffold for soft tissue ingrowth Good early results. a large number of long-term graft ruptures despite excellent early results 34

KENNEDY LIGAMENT AUGMENTATION DEVICE (LAD) – 1980 Ligament Augmentation Device (LAD) in 1980. Idea - protect the autogenous tissue graft early Problem - Stress shielding resulted. Later - effusion and synovitis. 35

LIGAMENT ADVANCED REINFORCEMENT SYSTEM (LARS) ARTIFICIAL LIGAMENT polyethylene terephthalate (PET). intra-articular segment Twist PET Encourage ingrowth wear resistance of 22 million of cycles = 10 years of straining use. 36

Literature on LARS One case synovitis reported short term. Short term results in a handful of papers are good. Fast recovery and return to sport/activity. risk of rupture remain and must be addressed through long-term follow-up studies. 37

38

3 ruptures of 159 1 synovitis 39

41

Longest Follow-up LARS ACL Reconstruction Using Artificial Ligament: Five Years Follow Up S.I.O.T. 2007; 33(suppl.1) : 8238-8242 G. Cerulli et at. 25 patients older than 40 - Lars® artificial ligaments at a five-years follow-up with very good results. 42

Dr Nicolas Duval using LARS since 1993 Best results are in early ACL repair augmented by LARS In older patients (more than 50) I use the LARS in any condition because of the low morbidity and easy rehab. 43

Why is rehab “Faster” No Donor site Morbidity Graft not going to weaken early. 44

LARS Indications Sportsmen who have acute injury require fast recovery for particular target time AND prepared to take the risks possible long term failure. Older patients with less demands however functional instability and want less involved rehab. 45

Patient Specific Approach Choose graft that matches the patients needs. Discuss the pros and cons of each graft.

LARS concept is good but not quite right 47

The future – Scaffolds and Growth Factors with Repair. tissue engineering techniques Grafts that regenerate a mechanically robust and natural ACL cell-specific growth factors that influencing the maturation and healing response of ligament tissue will also be available. 48

Platelet Rich Plamsa - Injections 49

50

51