CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2019; 54(01): 045-052
DOI: 10.1016/j.rbo.2017.09.008
Original Article | Artigo Original
Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revnter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Hamstring Tendon Autograft Contamination in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Comparison between two Harvesting Techniques[*]

Article in several languages: português | English
1  Hospital Madre Teresa, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil
,
Luís Henrique Grassi Marques da Costa
1  Hospital Madre Teresa, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil
,
Luiz Fernando Machado Soares
1  Hospital Madre Teresa, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil
,
Lúcio Honório de Carvalho Júnior
1  Hospital Madre Teresa, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil
2  Faculdade de Medicina, Departamento do Aparelho Locomotor, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil
3  Departamento de Medicina, Pontifícia Universidade Católica, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

01 July 2017

05 September 2017

Publication Date:
01 March 2019 (online)

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the contamination rate of hamstring tendon autografts by comparing two different techniques, and to verify whether intraoperative contamination is associated with the development of clinical infection in patients submitted to reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL).

Methods

A total of 110 hamstring tendon autograft ACL reconstructions were performed and divided into two groups: 1–hamstring tendon retraction technique; and 2 - technique maintaining the tibial insertion of the hamstring tendon. During the preparation, two graft fragments were sent for culturing; the harvesting time, the preparation time, and the total surgery time were measured. Twenty-four hours after the surgery, the C-reactive protein was assayed. The clinical outpatient follow-up was performed up to 180 days postoperatively.

Results

Although there were two postoperative infections, there was no graft contamination or difference between the groups in relation to the graft preparation time and to the 24-hour postoperative C-reactive protein assessment. The classic technique presented a longer graft harvesting time (p = 0.038), and there was no statistical difference between the 2 groups regarding the degree of contamination and consequent clinical infection, although 2 patients in group 2 presented with infection, with negative perioperative cultures.

Conclusion

Based on the results obtained, there was no association between graft contamination and the time or technique of its preparation. In addition, there was also no association between intraoperative contamination and the development of clinical infection, nor was there any sign of an association between the early alteration of C-reactive protein and the onset of infection.

* Work developed at the Hospital Madre Teresa, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.