SynthesisMusculoskeletal surgery2019
Passive anterior tibia translation in anterior cruciate ligament-injured, anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed and healthy knees: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Musculoskeletal surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Management of increased posterior tibial slope in ACL deficiency: A narrative review and recommendation of the Osteotomy Committee of the German Knee Society.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Review
- Associations between MRI Findings of the Anterolateral Ligament in Knee Injuries and Clinical Variables in Candidates for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2026Article
- Individualized indication for slope changing osteotomy in ACL insufficiency: the Avalanche Concept.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- Does Rotation and Anterior Translation Persist as Residual Instability in the Knee after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction? (Evaluation of Coronal Lateral Collateral Ligament Sign, Tibial Rotation, and Translation Measurements in Postoperative MRI).Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- A novel digital arthrometer to measure anterior tibial translation.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Correlation among Knee Muscle Strength and Self-Reported Outcomes Score, Anterior Tibial Displacement, and Time Post-Injury in Non-Coper Anterior Cruciate Ligament Deficient Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Copers and Noncopers Use Different Landing Techniques to Limit Anterior Tibial Translation After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2021Article
- Healthy subjects with lax knees use less knee flexion rather than muscle control to limit anterior tibia translation during landing.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anterior tibia translation (ATT) is mainly prevented by the anterior cruciate ligament. Passive ATT tests are commonly used to diagnose an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury, to select patients for an ACL reconstruction (ACLR), and as an outcome measure after an ACLR. The aim of this review was to present an overview of possible factors determining ATT. A second purpose was to give a summary of the ATT measured in the literature in healthy, ACL-injured and ACLR knees and a comparison between those groups. A literature search was conducted with PubMed. Inclusion criteria were full-text primary studies published in English between January 2006 and October 2016. Studies included reported ATT in explicit data in healthy as well as ACL-injured or ACLR knees or in ACL-injured as well as ACLR knees. Sixty-one articles met inclusion criteria. Two articles measured the ATT in healthy as well as ACL-injured knees, 51 in ACL-injured as well as in ACLR knees, three in ACLR as well as in healthy knees and three in healthy, ACL-injured and ACLR knees. A difference in ATT is found between healthy, contralateral, ACLR and ACL-injured knees and between chronic and acute ACL injury. Graft choices and intra-articular injuries are factors which could affect the ATT. The mean ATT was lowest to highest in ACLR knees using a bone-patella tendon-bone autograft, ACLR knees using a hamstring autograft, contralateral healthy knees, healthy knees, ACLR knees with an allograft and ACL-injured knees. Factors which could affect the ATT are graft choice, ACL injury or reconstruction, intra-articular injuries and whether an ACL injury is chronic or acute. Comparison of ATT between studies should be taken with caution as a high number of different measurement methods are used. To be able to compare studies, more consistency in measuring devices used should be introduced to measuring ATT. The clinical relevance is that an autograft ACLR might give better results than an allograft ACLR as knee laxity is greater when using an allograft tendon. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
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.