Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33026536›Full record

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

Knee muscle strength after quadriceps tendon autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Peta T Johnston, Jodie A McClelland, Julian A Feller, Kate E Webster

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 50 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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 2 countries.

Peta T JohnstonSchool of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia. 3579584@students.latrobe.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5668-7495
Jodie A McClellandSchool of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia.
Julian A FellerSchool of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia.
Kate E WebsterSchool of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC, 3086, Australia.
La Trobe University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeRestoration of knee muscle strength is associated with better outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, but little is known about the outcome of strength following quadriceps tendon autograft (QT) ACL reconstruction in relation to other graft types. The aim of this review was to evaluate strength outcomes of the knee extensors and knee flexors following QT ACL reconstruction compared to (1) the non-reconstructed contralateral limb and (2) alternative ACL graft types.

methodsFour electronic databases were searched up until 21st February 2020. Summary meta-analyses were performed comparing knee strength outcomes following QT ACL reconstruction to the contralateral limb by way of limb symmetry index (LSI). Comparative meta-analyses were performed comparing QT ACL reconstruction to alternative ACL grafts for the two most frequently reported strength outcome measures which were peak knee extensor torque LSI, and peak knee flexor torque LSI at the following post-operative periods: 3, 5-8, 9-15, 24, 36-60 months.

resultsIn total, 18 studies met the inclusion criteria. Knee strength outcomes of 952 QT ACL reconstructions were included and compared to either the contralateral limb or 1 of 4 alternative ACL graft types; 245 hamstring tendon autograft (HT), 143 patellar tendon autograft (PT), 45 quadriceps tendon allograft, and 21 tibialis anterior allograft. Knee extensor strength LSI following QT ACL reconstruction did not reach 90% even at 24 months post-operatively. Conversely, knee flexor strength LSI following QT ACL reconstruction exceeded 90% at the 9-15 months post-operative period. Knee extensor strength at 5-8 months following QT ACL reconstruction appears similar to PT but weaker than HT ACL reconstruction. In addition, peak knee flexor LSI was significantly greater at 5-8 months in QT ACL reconstruction patients compared to HT patients.

conclusionThe decision to utilize a QT graft for ACL reconstruction should include consideration of strength outcomes. Knee extensor strength recovery following QT ACL reconstruction appears not to be restored before 24 months. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionAutograftsHumansMuscle StrengthQuadriceps MuscleTendonsTransplantation, AutologousACL reconstructionKneeQuadriceps tendon autograftStrength

Identifiers

PMID33026536
OpenAlexW3091873047

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.