ArticleInternational orthopaedics2016
Prospective analysis using a patient-based health-related scale shows lower functional scores after posterior cruciate ligament reconstructions as compared with anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions of the knee.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Improves Sexual Health Postoperatively.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Article
- Posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for chronic lesions: clinical experience with hamstring versus ligament advanced reinforcement system as graft.International orthopaedics · 2020Observational
- Effect of Activity at Time of Injury and Concomitant Ligament Injuries on Patient-Reported Outcome After Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated the treatment outcome of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction using the Medical Outcome Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), a patient-based quality of life (QOL) questionnaire comparing it with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.
methodsPatients who underwent reconstruction at our center for PCL (n = 24) or ACL (n = 197) injury were studied. The patients were evaluated using SF-36, visual analogue scale (VAS) for knee pain, Lysholm scale, posterior or anterior tibial translation and range of motion (ROM) before surgery until 24 months after surgery. Results were compared.
resultsIn the ACL group, all evaluation methods showed significant improvement after surgery. In the PCL group, however, improvement was observed in only three of eight subscales of the SF-36, Lysholm score and posterior tibial translation after surgery. In intergroup comparison, the PCL group showed inferior performance in three subscales of the SF-36, Lysholm score and ROM for flexion compared with the ACL group.
conclusionsThe surgical outcome of PCL reconstruction was inferior to that of ACL reconstruction both in patient-based and conventional doctor-based assessments. An improved surgical technique for PCL is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27108956What 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.