Quadriceps Tendon Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Postoperative Rehabilitation and Complication Profiles
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
PURPOSE: The purposes of this study are to explore current elements for postoperative rehabilitation protocol after quadriceps tendon-anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (QT-ACLR), outline general timelines for progression of those elements, and explore their associated complication rates and profiles. METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, 5 online databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and PubMed) were searched and screened in duplicate using predetermined criteria for studies on the aforementioned patient population. Descriptive statistics are presented. RESULTS: A total of 56 studies were included, with 31 studies using quadriceps tendon with bone block (B-QT) and 26 studies using all-soft tissue quadriceps tendon (S-QT). The majority of studies permitted full weightbearing and range of motion (ROM) within the first 12 postoperative weeks, and motion-controlled braces within 6 weeks. Isometric exercises were initiated within 1 week after surgery, closed-chain exercises within 12 weeks, and open-chain and sports-specific exercises within 36 weeks. Complication profiles were similar between graft types and included graft failure (1.2%-1.6%), cyclops syndrome (0.4%-0.7%), and persistent stiffness (0.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Current postoperative rehabilitation strategies in ACLR with QT offer a complication profile comparable to those reported with other graft types. Based on the included rehabilitation regimen, these protocols should focus on early ROM, specifically on achieving full extension, alongside isometric quadriceps strengthening. Progression to closed- and open-chain exercises should follow in a progressive manner, similar to existing protocols in ACLR. Adjuncts such as motion-controlled bracing and continuous passive motion machines may be used if graft protection is prioritized. This review highlights the need for comparison of defined protocols against one another in the setting of QT-ACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.
