Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32435488›Full record

ReviewSAGE open medicine2020

Bioaugmentation in the surgical treatment of anterior cruciate ligament injuries: A review of current concepts and emerging techniques.

Austin MacFarland Looney, Joseph Daniel Leider, Andrew Ryan Horn, Blake Michael Bodendorfer

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in SAGE open medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05582226 (A Randomized, Single Blinded Study of the Augmentation of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Stump-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Versus Standard of Care Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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.

NCT05582226 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

A Randomized, Single Blinded Study of the Augmentation of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Stump-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells Versus Standard of Care Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

TypeinterventionalSponsorAndrews Research & Education FoundationRan2022 to 2023Enrolled50ConditionsACL TearArmsACL reconstruction, Mesenchymal stem cell implantation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Advanced Gene Therapy Strategies for the Repair of ACL Injuries.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Graft healing after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).Asia-Pacific journal of sports medicine, arthroscopy, rehabilitation and technology · 2021
    Review
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Austin MacFarland LooneyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2073-375X
Joseph Daniel LeiderDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Andrew Ryan HornDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
Blake Michael BodendorferDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1313-6025
Georgetown University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Injuries involving the anterior cruciate ligament are among the most common athletic injuries, and are the most common involving the knee. The anterior cruciate ligament is a key translational and rotational stabilizer of the knee joint during pivoting and cutting activities. Traditionally, surgical intervention in the form of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction has been recommended for those who sustain an anterior cruciate ligament rupture and wish to remain active and return to sport. The intra-articular environment of the anterior cruciate ligament makes achieving successful healing following repair challenging. Historically, results following repair were poor, and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction emerged as the gold-standard for treatment. While earlier literature reported high rates of return to play, the results of more recent studies with longer follow-up have suggested that anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction may not be as successful as once thought: fewer athletes are able to return to sport at their preinjury level, and many still go on to develop osteoarthritis of the knee at a relatively younger age. The four principles of tissue engineering (cells, growth factors, scaffolds, and mechanical stimuli) combined in various methods of bioaugmentation have been increasingly explored in an effort to improve outcomes following surgical treatment of anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Newer technologies have also led to the re-emergence of anterior cruciate ligament repair as an option for select patients. The different biological challenges associated with anterior cruciate ligament repair and reconstruction each present unique opportunities for targeted bioaugmentation strategies that may eventually lead to better outcomes with better return-to-play rates and fewer revisions.

Indexed as

ACL reconstructionACL repairACL surgeryanterior cruciate ligamentbiological augmentationknee ligament reconstructionorthopedics/rehabilitation/occupational therapy

Identifiers

PMID32435488
PMCPMC7222656
OpenAlexW3024414800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.