ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2020
A comparative analysis of the efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autologous ligament grafting at different time points.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Morphological Condition of the Remnant Tissue of 205 Patients According to the Time After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2025Article
- Acute and subacute anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions are associated with a higher risk of revision and reoperation.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Article
- A comparative analysis of the efficacy of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autologous ligament grafting at different time points.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study was performed to compare the clinical efficacies of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with autologous ligament grafting at different time points.
methodsEighty-five patients with ACL were categorized into two groups: Group A (GA, n = 45), who underwent early-stage (≤3 weeks) surgery, and Group B (GB, n = 40), who underwent advanced-stage (>3 weeks) surgery. Perioperative conditions, knee joint functions, activity and stability before and at 6 months postoperatively, changes in quality of life (QOL), good and excellent rates of knee joint functions, and incidence of complications were compared between the two groups.
resultsIn both groups, there was an increase in the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm score, and QOL and a decrease in the knee joint angle flexion limitation, angle of spread limitation, positive rates in the anterior drawer test (ADT), and Lachman test score (P < .05) after surgery. At 6 months postoperatively, the IKDC score, Lysholm score, and QOL were higher in GA than in GB (P < .05). The good and excellent rates of knee joint functions were higher in GA than in GB (93.33% vs. 77.50%) (P < .05).
conclusionAnterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with autologous ligament grafting can achieve good effects whether performed in the early or advanced stage; however, the improvements in patients' knee joint functions and QOL are better in the early stage. Therefore, early ACL reconstruction with autologous ligament grafting is suggested.
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.