Comparable isokinetic quadriceps performance six months after ACL reconstruction with rectus femoris versus hamstring tendon autografts
Authors:
- Márcio Cabral Fagundes RêgoMRMárcio Cabral Fagundes Rêgo
- Alef Cavalcanti Matias de BarrosABAlef Cavalcanti Matias de Barros
- Jamilson Simões BrasileiroJBJamilson Simões Brasileiro
- Marcelo Cabral Fagundes RêgoMRMarcelo Cabral Fagundes Rêgo
- Camilo Partezani HelitoCHCamilo Partezani Helito
- Carlos Eduardo da Silveira FrancioziCFCarlos Eduardo da Silveira Franciozi
- Diego Ariel de LimaDLDiego Ariel de Lima
Open Access
- 1 October 2025
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
- Vol. 12 (4)
Abstract
Purpose: To compare isokinetic quadriceps performance 6 months after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using rectus femoris (RF) versus hamstring tendon (HT) autografts. Methods: In this cross‐sectional study, 75 male patients who underwent primary ACLR with RF ( n = 31) or HT ( n = 44) autografts were evaluated ~6 months postoperatively. Bilateral isokinetic testing at single angular velocity 60°/s (Biodex Multi‐Joint System 4) measured peak torque (PT), PT normalized to body weight (PT/BW), angle at peak torque (aPT), total work (TW), and mean power (PM). Between‐group comparisons used independent t‐tests; paired comparisons were conducted within the RF group. Results: No between‐group differences were detected for PT, PT/BW, aPT, TW, or PM ( p > 0.05 for all—primary contrast PT: mean diff. 5.3 Nm; 95% CI –20.4 to 30.9; p = 0.689). Within the RF group, the operated limb showed lower PT, PT/BW, TW, and PM than the contralateral limb (all p ≤ 0.002), with no difference in aPT. Conclusions: At 6 months after ACLR, quadriceps performance did not differ between RF and HT autografts. These early data do not address return‐to‐sport timing or graft healing and should not be interpreted as evidence of equivalence (it is not powered for equivalence/non‐inferiority); rather, they support RF as a potential option warranting longer‐term studies incorporating functional tests and patient‐reported outcomes. Level of Evidence: Level III, cross‐sectional comparative study.Keywords
This publication has 32 references indexed in Scilit:
- Review of evolution of tunnel position in anterior cruciate ligament reconstructionWorld Journal of Orthopedics, 2015
- Isokinetic Testing in Evaluation Rehabilitation Outcome After ACL ReconstructionMedical Archives, 2015
- Minimally Invasive Harvest of a Quadriceps Tendon Graft With or Without a Bone BlockArthroscopy Techniques, 2014
- Return to play following ACL reconstruction: a systematic review about strength deficitsArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2014
- Intra‐articular remodelling of hamstring tendon grafts after anterior cruciate ligament reconstructionKnee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2013
- ACL Reconstruction: Choosing the Graft.2013
- Autografts Commonly Used in Anterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2011
- Factors explaining chronic knee extensor strength deficits after ACL reconstructionJournal of Orthopaedic Research, 2011
- Clinical Anatomy of the Quadriceps Femoris and Extensor Apparatus of the KneeClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 2009
- Arthroscopic Reconstruction of the Posterior Cruciate Ligament With Use of a Quadruple Hamstring Tendon Graft With 3‐ to 5‐Year Follow‐upArthroscopy, 2006