Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32240345›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2020

Anterior knee translation measurements after ACL reconstruction are influenced by the type of laximeter used.

Antonio Klasan, Sven Edward Putnis, Vikram Kandhari, Takeshi Oshima, David Anthony Parker

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

5 authors.

Antonio KlasanSydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, Level 1, The Gallery, 445 Victoria Ave, Chatswood, NSW, 2067, Australia. klasan.antonio@me.com.
Sven Edward PutnisSydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, Level 1, The Gallery, 445 Victoria Ave, Chatswood, NSW, 2067, Australia.
Vikram KandhariSydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, Level 1, The Gallery, 445 Victoria Ave, Chatswood, NSW, 2067, Australia.
Takeshi OshimaSydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, Level 1, The Gallery, 445 Victoria Ave, Chatswood, NSW, 2067, Australia.
David Anthony ParkerSydney Orthopaedic Research Institute, Level 1, The Gallery, 445 Victoria Ave, Chatswood, NSW, 2067, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLaximeters were designed to diagnose an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficient knee, but their use has now focused on providing an objective assessment of the anterior translation (AT) of an intact and ACL-reconstructed knee. In this study we report the introduction and direct comparison of an automated and computerized AT measurement device, GNRB, with the device previously established by the institute and as the current literature standard, the KT1000.

methodsA prospective data collection was commenced upon introduction of the GNRB. The measurements of AT in each patient were performed by the same investigator with each device using 134 N applied to both knees, giving a side-to-side difference. The investigators were a sport scientist, a biomechanical engineer and a physiotherapist. Increased AT was defined as a difference > 3 mm.

resultsThree investigators performed the measurements in 122 patients, 9.8 (± 1.8) months after ACL reconstruction. Mean AT of the healthy knee was 5.7 mm with KT1000 and 4.4 mm with GNRB (p = 0.002). Mean AT of the ACL reconstructed knee was 7.0 mm with the KT1000 and 5.3 mm with the GNRB (p = 0.037). The KT1000 had a higher variance of results than the GNRB (p < 0.001). There were 25 patients with increased AT measured by KT1000 compared with 12 patients using the GNRB (p < 0.016), with only 5 on both devices.

conclusionsGNRB has better consistency of results when compared to the KT1000. Both devices lack comparability for detecting increased AT, with the KT1000 recording a side-to-side difference of more than 3 mm in twice as many patients as the GNRB. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionBiomechanical PhenomenaFemaleHumansJoint InstabilityKneeKnee InjuriesKnee JointMalePostoperative PeriodProspective StudiesRange of Motion, ArticularReturn to SportAnterior cruciate ligamentGNRBKneeKT1000LaximeterLaximetryLaxity

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.