ArticleJournal of biomechanics2015
What is the best candidate allograft for ACL reconstruction? An in vitro mechanical and histologic study in a canine model.
Article in Journal of biomechanics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomechanical considerations are crucial for the success of tendon and meniscus allograft integration-a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2019Pooled it
- Improving Mechanical Properties of Tendon Allograft through Rehydration Strategies: An In Vitro Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The knee joint is generally characterized by very low friction and high wear resistance. Several previous studies have compared ACL with the commonly used allografts from tensile properties perspective. No study has reported about the graft tendons from a frictional perspective, which is an important parameter for ACL functional performance. Twenty hind legs were used to harvest FDP tendon, ACL, ACH, and patellar tendon. Samples were evaluated with surface friction testing, indentation testing for tendon compressive moduli, lubricin immunohistochemistry, and histologic analysis. Frictional force of FDP tendon and ACL was significantly less than that of patellar tendon and ACH at first and fifth cycles. At the tenth cycle, the FDP tendon, ACL, and ACH showed significantly less frictional force than patellar tendon; after 100 cycles, the FDP tendon and ACL showed significantly less frictional force than patellar tendon. The compressive moduli of the FDP tendon, ACL, and ACH were significantly greater than that of patellar tendon. Histologic results showed that FDP tendon and ACL had a smooth surface with a thin layer of epitenon cells; patellar tendon and ACH had a rough surface and a layer of paratenon. Lubricin was found on the surface and extracellular matrix of FDP tendon and ACL. There was only limited lubricin expression on the surface and extracellular matrix of the ACH and patellar tendon. The FDP tendon has friction force and lubricin expression similar to those of native ACL. However, patellar tendon and ACH show higher friction force and less lubricin expression than ACL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.