Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30547042›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2018

Effects of Remnant Tissue Preservation on Tunnel Enlargement After Anatomic Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using the Hamstring Tendon.

Tetsuro Masuda, Eiji Kondo, Jun Onodera, Nobuto Kitamura, Masayuki Inoue, Eiichi Nakamura, Tomonori Yagi, Norimasa Iwasaki, Kazunori Yasuda

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Remnant preservation does not affect accuracy of tibial tunnel positioning in single-bundle ACL reconstruction.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2021
    Article
  15. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tetsuro MasudaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Eiji KondoDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Jun OnoderaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Nobuto KitamuraDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Masayuki InoueDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, NTT East Sapporo Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.
Eiichi NakamuraDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan.
Tomonori YagiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yagi Orthopaedic Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.
Norimasa IwasakiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine and Graduate School of Medicine, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan.
Kazunori YasudaSports Medicine and Arthroscopy Center, Yagi Orthopaedic Hospital, Sapporo, Japan.
Hokkaido University · JPKumamoto University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe effects of remnant tissue preservation on tunnel enlargement after anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction have not yet been established. HYPOTHESIS: The preservation of ACL remnant tissue may significantly reduce the degree and incidence of tunnel enlargement after anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction, while the remnant-preserving procedure may not significantly increase the incidence of tunnel coalition after surgery. STUDY

designCohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

methodsA total of 79 patients underwent anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction. Based on the Crain classification of ACL remnant tissue, 40 patients underwent the remnant-preserving procedure (group P), and the remaining 39 patients underwent the remnant-resecting procedure (group R). There were no differences between the 2 groups concerning all background factors, including preoperative knee instability and intraoperative tunnel positions. All patients were examined using computed tomography and a standard physical examination at 2 weeks and 1 year after surgery.

resultsDuring surgery, the femoral and tibial anteromedial (AM) tunnel sizes in both groups averaged 6.6 and 6.5 mm, respectively. The femoral and tibial posterolateral (PL) tunnel sizes in both groups averaged 6 and 6 mm, respectively. There were no differences in the intraoperative tunnel positions and tunnel sizes between groups. Concerning the femoral AM tunnel, the degree of tunnel enlargement in the oblique coronal and oblique axial views in group P was significantly less than that in group R (

conclusionRemnant preservation in anatomic double-bundle ACL reconstruction reduced enlargement of the femoral AM tunnel and did not increase the incidence of tunnel coalition. This is one of the advantages of remnant-preserving ACL reconstruction.

Indexed as

anatomic double-bundle reconstructionanterior cruciate ligamentclinical outcomehamstring tendon graftremnant tissuetunnel enlargement

Identifiers

PMID30547042
PMCPMC6287319
OpenAlexW2904770060

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.