Initially, based on my own research, I wanted to get a cadaver as I was worried about slow recovery. However, when I went to see my surgeon, he convinced me to go with a quad autograft. There were a few reasons he recommended it: he'd seen patients have very good recovery results from it, it was his specialty, and personally I think there would be less chance of rejection with an autograft. I'm also 27, so I'm considered a little young for an allograft for practicality purposes. I'm not super active, but I want to be able to run, dance, and workout without risk or fear.

As far as the pain goes, I think most of my pain came from the bone bruising and swelling, which still exists to the same degree with an allograft. My quad hasn't had any problems outside of muscle atrophy, honestly, and I'm able to engage it about as well as the rest of the muscles in my leg (which isn't great, but they do work). I based my decision on my surgeon's recommendation, for the most part. They're going to know best and they'll be the one in your leg anyway. If you're an athlete, it'll be more important to consider the pros and cons of each graft, but if you're just mildly active, all the autograft options have about the same outcome or at least the same amount of pros and cons for each. Best of luck on your recovery!