ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma
Current practice variations in the management of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in Delhi.
Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Techniques and Postoperative Care Among Leaders in the Field: A Survey of the Herodicus Society.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Trends of Publications on Single- and Double-Bundle ACL Reconstructions over the Last 20 Years: A Bibliometric Analysis of the PubMed Literature.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Analysis of Postural Control following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with Ipsilateral Peroneus Longus Tendon Graft.Malaysian orthopaedic journal · 2023Article
- Trends in Primary Anatomical Single-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Practice in Adult Patients Prevalent Among Arthroscopy Surgeons of Six Southern States of India.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2022Article
- Biomechanical analysis of three different types of fixators for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction via finite element method: a patient-specific study.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2021Article
- Preferences in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and return to sport: A survey among surgeons in the Netherlands.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2021Article
- Tibiofemoral joint contact area and stress after single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with transtibial versus anteromedial portal drilling techniques.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2018Article
- New Trends in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of National Surveys of the Last 5 Years.Joints · 2018Review
- Bilateral simultaneous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A case series and review of the literature.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and traumaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to determine the current practices and preferences of the arthroscopic surgeons of Delhi in the diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury.
methodsIt was a cross-sectional descriptive study conducted among arthroscopic surgeons of Delhi. A survey was conducted using a questionnaire that was sent either by e-mail or by direct contact to all sixty arthroscopic surgeons of Delhi.
resultsForty-eight (80%) surgeons responded to our questionnaire. Maximum participants (83.3%) used semitendinosus/gracilis tendon autograft for ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and only 2.1% were using bone-patellar-tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft. Most preferred method of graft fixation was an 'interference screw' on the tibial side and an 'endobutton' on the femoral side, which was preferred by 95.83% and 93.75% surgeons, respectively. Almost all respondents (97%) used a bio-absorbable interference screw for tibial side graft fixation. Postoperative bracing was advised for <3 weeks by 47.9% surgeons and for 3-6 weeks by 31.3%. The results were analysed using statistical analysis.
conclusionSurgeon preferences in ACLR differ considerably among the arthroscopic surgeons of Delhi. There is majority consensus for using Hamstring autograft (single bundle) with a suspensory fixation on the femoral side and an aperture fixation on the tibial side. Transportal technique of making the femoral tunnel and preservation of amputation stump were the preferred methods. However, differences exist over the timing of surgery, rehab after surgery, pain management, etc.
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.