The debate of which graft is the more effective has been around for years, generally it's down to the surgeons preference however there's a perceived weaknesses' with both methods of treatment. the patellar tendon is frowned upon by a lot of surgeons and professional's now as this graft weakens the opposite knee from the one that sustained the injury. the hamstring graft on the other hand has the potential to further weaken the already injured leg if recovery is not done right. these two types of grafts were around from the beginning of ACL reconstructions in 1918 but due to the old methods of surgery (open knee surgery) the patellar tendon was preferred as it was easier to get right but recently the hamstring graft has grown in popularity due to it's cleaner, less invasive procedure.
stats that have come from Denmark seem to contradict the more popular graft however. it found hamstring grafts to have a 4x greater risk of re rupturing their ACL in the first year after returning to play and are 1.5x more likely to up to 5 years following ACL reconstruction.
in conclusion for me the hamstring graft is still the better option, it's a far less invasive procedure and when you take into account the fact that now both knee's are vulnerable after a patellar tendon reconstruction I feel that overall the risk of another serious injury is reduced significantly.
No comments:
Post a Comment