Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30094753›Full record

ReviewSports medicine - open2018

A Narrative Review of Four Different New Techniques in Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair: "Back to the Future" or Another Trend?

Michael-Alexander Malahias, Dimitrios Chytas, Kaori Nakamura, Vasileios Raoulis, Masashi Yokota, Vasileios S Nikolaou

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sports medicine - open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. ACL repair for athletes?Journal of orthopaedics
    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

6 authors.

Michael-Alexander Malahias2nd Department of Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece. alexandermalahias@yahoo.gr.
Dimitrios Chytas2nd Department of Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Kaori NakamuraDepartment of Joint Surgery and Sports Medicine, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 1-5-45 Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8510, Japan.
Vasileios RaoulisDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, School of Health Sciences, University of Thessaly, Larissa, Greece.
Masashi YokotaDepartment of Sports Medicine, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Japan.
Vasileios S Nikolaou2nd Department of Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recently, four different operative techniques, referring to the primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair, were described. These are the dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS) with Ligamys™, the Bridge-enhanced repair (BEAR), the use of internal brace, and the refixation with suture anchors. The purpose of this study was to assess the already-published, clinical, and pre-clinical results of those techniques. A literature review was conducted and implemented by three independent researchers. Inclusion criteria were clinical or cadaveric or animal studies about patients suffering from ACL rupture, who were treated with one of those four different arthroscopic techniques of primary ACL repair. There were 10 clinical trials dealing with the different techniques of primary ACL repair and 12 cadaveric or animal studies. The majority of the published clinical trials investigated the dynamic intraligamentary stabilization (DIS), while only four studies referred to the three other surgical techniques. Most of the clinical trials suggested that primary ACL repair should be done during the first 14-21 days after a proximal ACL rupture and not later. Further clinical evidence is needed for the techniques of bridge-enhanced ACL repair, internal brace, and suture anchors ACL refixation in order to support the animal and cadaveric biomechanical studies. Till now, the existing clinical trials were not enough to establish the use of those techniques in the ACL-ruptured patients. On the contrary, the Dynamic intraligamentary stabilization with Ligamys™ device demonstrated very promising results in different types of clinical studies.

Indexed as

Bridge-enhanced ACL repairDynamic intraligamentary stabilizationInternal braceLiterature reviewPrimary ACL repairSuture anchors

Identifiers

PMID30094753
PMCPMC6085215

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.