No difference in osteoarthritis, but less graft failures after 5 years, comparing anatomic double-bundle to anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2025 Aug;33(8):2781-2792. doi: 10.1002/ksa.12528. Epub 2024 Nov 7.

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of knee osteoarthritis (OA) between the anatomic single-bundle (SB) and anatomic double-bundle (DB) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction technique after 5-year follow-up (FU). Secondary objectives were to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), clinical examination, activity level, functional tests and graft failures between the two groups.

Methods: The study was a secondary analysis after 5-year FU of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) (Clinical Trials NCT01033188). One hundred and twenty patients between 18 and 40 years were randomized to either anatomic SB or anatomic DB reconstruction. The Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) classification grade ≥2 and the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) atlas criteria score ≥2 were used for defining OA. Additionally, PROMs were obtained and clinical examinations of the knees were performed. Finally, the number of patients experiencing graft failure in each group was recorded.

Results: Radiographic imaging was performed in 39 patients in the SB group and in 37 patients in the DB group. Four patients (10%) in the SB group and two (5%) in the DB group developed osteoarthritis according to the KL classification (p = 0.28). Five (13%) in the SB group and three (8%) in the DB group developed osteoarthritis according to the OARSI atlas criteria (p = 0.59; difference 5.0% [95% confidence interval, CI: -0.10 to 0.20]). There were no significant differences in the PROMs, clinical examinations, activity levels, or functional tests when comparing the two groups. Of initially 62 SB patients, 14 (23%) experienced graft failure compared to 4 (7%) of the 58 DB patients (p = 0.015; difference 0.016 [95% CI: 0.03-0.29]).

Conclusion: At 5-year FU, there were no significant differences in the incidence of OA, PROMS, or other clinical findings comparing the anatomic DB to anatomic SB ACL reconstructed patients. There were fewer graft failures among patients treated with anatomic DB ACL reconstruction.

Level of evidence: Level II.

Keywords: ACL reconstruction; double‐bundle; graft failure; osteoarthritis; revision.

Publication types

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries* / surgery
  • Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction* / adverse effects
  • Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction* / methods
  • Female
  • Follow-Up Studies
  • Graft Rejection* / epidemiology
  • Humans
  • Incidence
  • Male
  • Osteoarthritis, Knee* / epidemiology
  • Osteoarthritis, Knee* / etiology
  • Patient Reported Outcome Measures
  • Young Adult