Original Article | Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics | Vol 10 | Issue 2 | July-December 2025 | page: 105-110| Pankaj Kumar Singh, Avinash Kumar Singh, Dinesh Kumar Chaturvedi, Sachin Kale

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13107/jcorth.2025.v10.i02.792

Open Access License: CC BY-NC 4.0
Copyright Statement: Copyright © 2025; The Author(s).

Submitted Date: 11 Jul 2025, Review Date: 08 Aug 2025, Accepted Date: 10 Sep 2025 & Published Date: 10 Dec 2025

Author: Pankaj Kumar Singh [1], Avinash Kumar Singh [1], Dinesh Kumar Chaturvedi [1], Sachin Kale [2]

[1] Department of Orthopaedic, Heritage Institute of Medical Sciences, Varanasi, U.P., India.
[2] Department of Orthopaedic, Dr. D Y Patil School of Medicine, Nerul, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Address of Correspondence
Dr. Avinash Kumar Singh,
Department of Orthopaedic, Heritage Institute of Medical Sciences, Varanasi, U.P., India.
E-mail: avinashsingha@gmail.com

Abstract

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is widely performed to restore knee stability following ligament rupture. The choice of autograft remains pivotal in determining long-term functional outcomes. While hamstring tendon (HT) autografts are commonly used, they are associated with donor site morbidity and variable graft diameter. Fibularis longus tendon (PLT) has emerged as a promising alternative due to its favourable biomechanical properties and potential to preserve hamstring function.
Objectives: To assess and compare the functional outcomes, knee stability, and donor site morbidity associated with PLT versus HT autografts in patients undergoing ACL reconstruction.
Methods: A prospective comparative clinical study was conducted between August 2023 and March 2025 at a tertiary care institute in Varanasi. Fifty patients with isolated ACL tears were randomly assigned to undergo reconstruction using either HT or PLT autografts (25 per group). All underwent standardized arthroscopic techniques and a uniform rehabilitation protocol. Functional outcomes were assessed using IKDC, Lysholm, and Cincinnati scores; donor site morbidity using AOFAS and FADI scores; and knee stability via Lachman, pivot shift, and anterior drawer tests.
Results: Both groups showed significant improvement in IKDC scores postoperatively. The PLT group had a slightly higher mean IKDC at 1 year (90.90 vs 89.52; p=0.068), greater graft diameter, and better preservation of thigh muscle mass. No significant differences in knee stability tests or major complications were observed.
Conclusion: PLT is a reliable and effective autograft, showing comparable if not slightly superior functional outcomes to HT in ACL reconstruction, with minimal donor site morbidity.
Keywords: Anterior Cruciate Ligament, Autografts, Fibularis Longus Tendon, Hamstring Tendon, Functional Outcome.

References

1. Chia L, De Oliveira Silva D, Whalan M, McKay MJ, Sullivan J, Fuller CW, Pappas E. Non-contact anterior cruciate ligament injury epidemiology in team-ball sports: a systematic review with meta-analysis by sex, age, sport, participation level, and exposure type. Sports medicine. 2022 Oct;52(10):2447-67.
2. Mlv SK, Mahmood A, Vatsya P, Garika SS, Mittal R, Nagar M. Demographic characteristics of patients who underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at a tertiary care hospital in India. World Journal of Clinical Cases. 2023 May 26;11(15):3464.
3. Gokeler A, Grassi A, Hoogeslag R, van Houten A, Lehman T, Bolling C, Buckthorpe M, Norte G, Benjaminse A, Heuvelmans P, Di Paolo S. Return to sports after ACL injury 5 years from now: 10 things we must do. Journal of experimental orthopaedics. 2022 Jul 30;9(1):73.
4. Rovere G, Stramazzo L, Romeo M, D’Arienzo A, Maccauro G, Camarda L. Hamstring graft preparation for ACL reconstruction. Orthopedic Reviews. 2022 Dec 17;14(5):38408.
5. Giusti S, Susca M, Cerulli S, De Fenu E, Adriani E. Donor‐Site Morbidity in Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Reconstruction With All‐Soft Tissue Quadriceps Tendon Autograft vs. Hamstring Tendon Autograft: A Retrospective Monocentric Observational Study. Advances in Orthopedics. 2025;2025(1):8833546.
6. Keyhani S, Qoreishi M, Mousavi M, Ronaghi H, Soleymanha M. Peroneus longus tendon autograft versus hamstring tendon autograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comparative study with a mean follow-up of two years. Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2022 Aug;10(8):695.
7. Gök B, Kanar M, Tutak Y. Peroneus longus vs hamstring tendon autografts in ACL reconstruction: A comparative study of 106 patients’ outcomes. Medical Science Monitor: International Medical Journal of Experimental and Clinical Research. 2024 Oct 26;30:e945626.
8. Rhatomy S, Hartoko L, Setyawan R, Soekarno NR, Asikin AI, Pridianto D, Mustamsir E. Single bundle ACL reconstruction with peroneus longus tendon graft: 2-years follow-up. Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma. 2020 May 1;11:S332-6.
9. Liu CT, Lu YC, Huang CH. Half-peroneus-longus-tendon graft augmentation for unqualified hamstring tendon graft of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Journal of Orthopaedic Science. 2015 Sep;20(5):854-60.
10. Angthong C, Chernchujit B, Apivatgaroon A, Chaijenkit K, Nualon P, Suchao-in K. The anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with the peroneus longus tendon: a biomechanical and clinical evaluation of the donor ankle morbidity. J Med Assoc Thai. 2015 Jun 1;98(6):555-60.
11. Wiradiputra AE, Aryana GN. Peroneus longus tendon graft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a case report and review of literature. International Journal of Surgery Case Reports. 2021 Jun 1;83:106028.
12. Roe J, Pinczewski LA, Russell VJ, Salmon LJ, Kawamata T, Chew M. A 7-year follow-up of patellar tendon and hamstring tendon grafts for arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: differences and similarities. The American journal of sports medicine. 2005 Sep;33(9):1337-45.
13. Park SY, Oh H, Park S, Lee JH, Lee SH, Yoon KH. Factors predicting hamstring tendon autograft diameters and resulting failure rates after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2013 May;21(5):1111-8.
14. Feller JA, Webster KE. A randomized comparison of patellar tendon and hamstring tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The American journal of sports medicine. 2003 Jul;31(4):564-73.
15. He J, Tang Q, Ernst S, Linde MA, Smolinski P, Wu S, Fu F. Peroneus longus tendon autograft has functional outcomes comparable to hamstring tendon autograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2021 Sep;29(9):2869-79.
16. Khalil MH, Zawam SH. Comparative study of Peroneus longus tendon autograft versus Hamstring tendon autograft in arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. International Orthopaedics. 2025 Jun;49(6):1365-72.
17. Kerimoglu S, Aynaci O, Saracoglu M, Aydin H, Turhan A. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with the peroneus longus tendon. Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica. 2008 Jan 1;42(1):38-43.

 (Article Text HTML)  (Download PDF)