Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32602038›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2021

Remnant preservation does not affect accuracy of tibial tunnel positioning in single-bundle ACL reconstruction.

Jonathan D Kosy, Katie Walmsley, Elizabeth A Gordon, Sadie V Heddon, Rahul Anaspure, Peter J Schranz, Vipul I Mandalia

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

7 authors.

Jonathan D KosyExeter Knee Reconstruction Unit, Princess Elizabeth Orthopaedic Centre, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter, EX2 5DW, Devon, UK. Jonkosy@yahoo.co.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1676-0851
Katie WalmsleyExeter Knee Reconstruction Unit, Princess Elizabeth Orthopaedic Centre, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter, EX2 5DW, Devon, UK.
Elizabeth A GordonResearch and Development Department, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK.
Sadie V HeddonResearch and Development Department, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK.
Rahul AnaspureRadiology Department, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter, UK.
Peter J SchranzExeter Knee Reconstruction Unit, Princess Elizabeth Orthopaedic Centre, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter, EX2 5DW, Devon, UK.
Vipul I MandaliaExeter Knee Reconstruction Unit, Princess Elizabeth Orthopaedic Centre, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Barrack Road, Exeter, EX2 5DW, Devon, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRemnant preservation, in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, has potential biological advantages. However, graft positioning remains vital to functional outcome and the prevention of failure. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy and precision of tibial tunnel positioning in remnant preservation single-bundle hamstring reconstruction.

methodsFifty consecutive adult patients, with isolated ACL rupture, were recruited to a prospective study. Remnant preservation was performed in all cases where > 25% of the native ACL was present. Three-dimensional computer tomography was preformed 3-6 months post-operatively to assess tibial tunnel position (using a grid-based measurement). Accuracy and precision of this technique were assessed against published anatomical data in direct comparison with the group where remnant preservation could not be performed.

resultsTwo patients withdrew following surgery. In the remaining groups (31 remnant preservation; 17 non-remnant preservation), no difference was demonstrated in tunnel position (40.4 ± 6.7% (anterior-to-posterior) and 47.4 ± 1.5% (medial-to-lateral) vs. 38.8 ± 4.9% and 46.7 ± 1.5%, respectively; n.s.), accuracy (6.1% vs. 4.8%; n.s.) or precision (3.9% vs. 2.8%; n.s.).

conclusionsRemnant preservation can be safely performed without compromising tunnel position. Therefore, the potential benefits of this technique can be utilised, in clinical practice, without sacrificing the ability to optimize tibial tunnel positioning. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Indexed as

AdultAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionFemaleHamstring TendonsHumansImaging, Three-DimensionalKnee JointMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative PeriodProspective StudiesTibiaTomography, X-Ray ComputedYoung AdultAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionRemnant preservationThree-dimensional computer tomographyTibial tunnel position

Identifiers

PMID32602038

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.