Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25344803›Full record

SynthesisKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2016

A systematic review of single- versus double-bundle ACL reconstruction using the anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction scoring checklist.

Neel Desai, Eduard Alentorn-Geli, Carola F van Eck, Volker Musahl, Freddie H Fu, Jón Karlsson, Kristian Samuelsson

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Anatomic ACL reconstruction reduces risk of post-traumatic osteoarthritis: a systematic review with minimum 10-year follow-up.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Restoring tibiofemoral alignment during ACL reconstruction results in better knee biomechanics.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors.

Neel DesaiDepartment of Orthopedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, 431 80, Mölndal, Sweden.
Eduard Alentorn-GeliDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital del Mar - Parc de Salut Mar, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Carola F van EckDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Volker MusahlDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Freddie H FuDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Jón KarlssonDepartment of Orthopedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, 431 80, Mölndal, Sweden.
Kristian SamuelssonDepartment of Orthopedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, 431 80, Mölndal, Sweden. kristian@samuelsson.cc.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this systematic review was to apply the anatomic ACL reconstruction scoring checklist (AARSC) and to evaluate the degree to which clinical studies comparing single-bundle (SB) and double-bundle (DB) ACL reconstructions are anatomic.

methodsA systematic electronic search was performed using the databases PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE and Cochrane Library. Studies published from January 1995 to January 2014 comparing SB and DB ACL reconstructions with clinical outcome measurements were included. The items from the AARSC were recorded for both the SB and DB groups in each study.

resultsEight-thousand nine-hundred and ninety-four studies were analysed, 77 were included. Randomized clinical trials (29; 38%) and prospective comparative studies (29; 38%) were the most frequent study type. Most studies were published in 2011 (19; 25%). The most commonly reported items for both SB and DB groups were as follows: graft type (152; 99%), femoral and tibial fixation method (149; 97% respectively), knee flexion angle during graft tensioning (124; 8%) and placement of the tibial tunnel at the ACL insertion site (101; 66%). The highest level of documentation used for ACL tunnel position for both groups was often one dimensional, e.g. drawing, operative notes or o'clock reference. The DB reconstruction was in general more thoroughly reported. The means for the AARSC were 6.9 ± 2.8 for the SB group and 8.3 ± 2.8 for the DB group. Both means were below a proposed required minimum score of 10 for anatomic ACL reconstruction.

conclusionsThere was substantial underreporting of surgical data for both the SB and DB groups in clinical studies. This underreporting creates difficulties when analysing, comparing and pooling results of scientific studies on this subject.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate LigamentAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionChecklistHumansKnee JointTransplantsAARSCAnatomicAnterior cruciate ligamentReconstructionScoreSurgical technique

Identifiers

PMID25344803

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.