Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24005332›Full record

Trial reportKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2014

Femoral fixation of hamstring tendon grafts in ACL reconstructions: the 2-year follow-up results of a prospective randomized controlled study.

Tone Gifstad, Jon Olav Drogset, Torbjørn Grøntvedt, Grete Sofie Hortemo

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Femoral interference screw fixation of hamstring and quadriceps tendons for ACL reconstruction.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tone GifstadOrthopaedic Research Center, Trondheim University Hospital, 7006, Trondheim, Norway, tone.gifstad@ntnu.no.
Jon Olav Drogset
Torbjørn Grøntvedt
Grete Sofie Hortemo
St Olav's University Hospital · NOAleris Rosenborgklinikken · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeHamstring tendon grafts are commonly used in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstructions. A number of fixation devices are available; however, several have limited clinical support. To our knowledge, no randomized controlled study comparing the EZLoc and the Bone Mulch Screw for femoral fixation in ACL reconstruction exists. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the results following the use of these two femoral fixation devices. Time in surgery for the two methods was also to be compared.

methodsA total of 110 patients between 18 and 45 years old at two orthopaedic departments, A (n = 55) and B (n = 55), were randomized to ACL reconstruction with femoral fixation of the hamstring graft with either the EZLoc or the Bone Mulch Screw. Surgical time was measured for each group. The patients were evaluated after 6 weeks and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. The clinical examination included range of motion, evaluation of intraarticular swelling, tenderness at the lateral femoral condyle, the Lachman test, the Pivot shift test and the KT-1000 arthrometer. In addition, the visual analogue scale score for pain, the Tegner activity score, the Lysholm functional score and the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score were recorded. Knee extension and flexion muscle strength were also measured with a Biodex.

resultsThere were no significant differences in any of the parameters mentioned above at the 2-year follow-up evaluation. Three patients in each group underwent revision ACL reconstruction during the study. More than 95% of the knees in both groups were found to be stable. Good to excellent results were found for all selected knee scores in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in any of the muscle strength parameters. Time in surgery was statistically significantly shorter in the EZLoc group compared with the Bone Mulch group.

conclusionThere were no statistically significant differences in clinical findings, knee scores or in muscle strength between the EZLoc group and the Bone Mulch group at the 2-year follow-up evaluation. Time in surgery was statistically significantly shorter for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction with hamstring grafts when the EZLoc femoral fixation device was used. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnterior Cruciate LigamentAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionFemaleFemurFollow-Up StudiesHumansJoint InstabilityKnee InjuriesKnee JointMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesTendons

Identifiers

PMID24005332
OpenAlexW2080069729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.