SynthesisMedicine2016
Autograft versus allograft in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Medium-term functional outcomes comparing soft-tissue autografts with allografts in primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction : a systematic review and meta-analysis.Bone & joint open · 2026Pooled it
- Comparable outcome for autografts and allografts in primary medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction for patellofemoral instability: systematic review and meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Pooled it
- Autograft or allograft for reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament: a health economics perspective.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2019Pooled it
- Short-term clinical, functional and MRI findings after hamstring allograft vs. autograft ACL reconstruction : A pilot randomized controlled trial.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2026Article
- Reconstruction of chronic proximal hamstring tear with hamstring autograft-hamstring on hamstring technique: technical note.Journal of hip preservation surgery · 2026Article
- Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Fresh Frozen Soft Tissue Allograft: A Retrospective Case Series.Cureus · 2025Article
- Single-stage autograft revision for failed ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Improved clinical outcomes at a minimum 5-year follow-up.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Surgical Management for Hair Restoration: A Review of Contemporary Techniques.Aesthetic plastic surgery · 2023Review
- Current trends in graft choice for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction - part II: In-vivo kinematics, patient reported outcomes, re-rupture rates, strength recovery, return to sports and complications.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Current trends in the anterior cruciate ligament part II: evaluation, surgical technique, prevention, and rehabilitation.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Review
- Improved osteogenesis in rat femur segmental defects treated with human allograft and zinc adjuvants.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2021Article
- Development and maintenance of tendons and ligaments.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2021Review
- Small Size Autograft versus Large Size Allograft in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2021Observational
- Allograft for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Long-Term Comparative Effectiveness and Safety. Results of a Health Technology Assessment.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2020Review
- Return to Play and Performance After Primary ACL Reconstruction in American Football Players: A Systematic Review.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2020Review
- Histological analysis of ACL reconstruction failures due to synthetic-ACL (LARS) ruptures.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2020Article
- Italian consensus statement for the use of allografts in ACL reconstructive surgery.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2019Article
- The use of allograft tissue in posterior cruciate, collateral and multi-ligament knee reconstruction.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2019Review
- A case report of anterior cruciate ligament and posterolateral corner reconstruction using tendon graft preserved in situ.International journal of surgery case reports · 2018Article
- A comparative study of effect of autograft compared with allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on expressions ofBioscience reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is considered as the standard surgical procedure for the treatment of ACL tear. However, there is a crucial controversy in terms of whether to use autograft or allograft in ACL reconstruction. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare autograft with allograft for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction.
methodsPubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared autograft with allograft in ACL reconstruction up to January 31, 2016. The relative risk or mean difference with 95% confidence interval was calculated using either a fixed- or random-effects model. The risk of bias for individual studies according to the Cochrane Handbook. The trial sequential analysis was used to test the robustness of our findings and get more conservative estimates.
resultsThirteen trials were included, involving 1636 participants. The results of this meta-analysis indicated that autograft brought about lower clinical failure, better overall International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) level, better pivot-shift test, better Lachman test, greater Tegner score, and better instrumented laxity test (P < 0.05) than allograft. Autograft was not statistically different from allograft in Lysholm score, subjective IKDC score, and Daniel 1-leg hop test (P > 0.05). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that autograft was superior to irradiated allograft for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction in clinical failure, Lysholm score, pivot-shift test, Lachman test, Tegner score, instrumented laxity test, and subjective IKDC score (P < 0.05). Moreover, there were no significant differences between autograft and nonirradiated allograft.
conclusionsAutograft is superior to irradiated allograft for patients undergoing ACL reconstruction concerning knee function and laxity, but there are no significant differences between autograft and nonirradiated allograft. However, our results should be interpreted with caution, because the blinding methods were not well used.
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.