Lateral Extra‐articular Tenodesis is Cost‐Effective at the Time of Primary Hamstring Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in High‐Risk Patients
- 26 April 2026
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Arthroscopy
Abstract
Purpose: To perform breakeven analysis to assess the cost‐effectiveness of performing lateral extra‐articular tenodesis (LET) at the time of hamstring autograft primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in high‐risk patients. Methods: Baseline costs for ACLR, ACLR with LET (ACLR‐LET), revision ACLR, and initial failure rate were collected from the literature. Two initial failure rates following hamstring autograft ACLR without LET in high‐risk patients were used based on a previous study: the rate of revision surgery (11%) and the rate of clinical failure due to rotatory instability (40%). Breakeven economic analysis was used to assess the cost‐effectiveness of adding LET to primary ACLR. To account for the variability in cost, initial failure rates, and procedural differences across institutions, a wide range of values were used to calculate the absolute risk reduction (ARR) and number needed to treat (NNT) to achieve cost‐effectiveness. Results: Assuming primary ACLR cost of $20,840, ACLR‐LET cost of $27,405, and revision ACLR cost of $35,205, primary LET is cost‐effective at initial failure rates exceeding 18.7% (ARR = 0.187, NNT = 5). Assuming a 40% failure rate, LET is cost‐effective when revision surgery costs are greater than $16,412 (ARR = 0.400, NNT = 3) or when primary ACLR‐LET costs less than $39,422 (ARR = 0.400, NNT = 3). When assuming a failure rate of 11%, LET is cost‐effective when revision surgery costs exceed $59,700 (ARR = 0.110, NNT = −9) or when primary ACLR‐LET is no greater than $24,712 (ARR = 0.110, NNT = 10). Conclusions: Primary LET is a cost‐effective intervention for a wide range of primary and revision surgery costs according to this breakeven economic analysis. Using surgical cost estimates from literature, LET is cost‐effective when the initial failure exceeds 18.7%, or when revision surgery exceeds $16,412, which is greater than reported in current literature, thus indicating the clinical and economic benefits of primary LET in high‐risk patients undergoing hamstring autograft ACLR. Level of Evidence: Level IV, economic analysis.Keywords
This publication has 42 references indexed in Scilit:
- Editorial Commentary: Indications for Lateral Extra‐Articular Tenodesis in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionArthroscopy, 2022
- Failure rates of common grafts used in ACL reconstructions: a systematic review of studies published in the last decadeArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2021
- Revision ACL reconstruction has higher incidence of 30‐day hospital readmission, reoperation, and surgical complications relative to primary proceduresKnee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2021
- ACL Study Group survey reveals the evolution of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction graft choice over the past three decadesKnee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2021
- Editorial Commentary : Graft Choice for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Will There Ever Be a Correct Answer? Probably NotArthroscopy, 2020
- The 22-Modifier in Reimbursement for Orthopedic Procedures: Hip Arthroplasty and Obesity Are Worth the EffortThe Journal of Arthroplasty, 2018
- Graft failure is more frequent after hamstring than patellar tendon autograftKnee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2018
- What Is the Mid-term Failure Rate of Revision ACL Reconstruction? A Systematic ReviewClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 2017
- Long‐term results after reconstruction of the ACL with hamstrings autograft and transtibial femoral drillingKnee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2012
- A long‐term study of anterior cruciate ligament allograft reconstructionKnee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2009