Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33146767›Full record

ArticleInternational orthopaedics2021

Measurement technique for posterior tibial slope on radiographs can affect its relationship to the risk of anterior cruciate ligament rupture.

Edoardo Gaj, Edoardo Monaco, Angelo De Carli, Megan Rianne Wolf, Carlo Massafra, Andrea Redler, Daniele Mazza, Andrea Ferretti

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Posterior tibial slope (PTS) ≥ 10 degrees is a risk factor for further anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury; BMI is not.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023
    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

8 authors.

Edoardo GajDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Rome "La Sapienza", Sant'Andrea Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Edoardo MonacoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Rome "La Sapienza", Sant'Andrea Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Angelo De CarliDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Rome "La Sapienza", Sant'Andrea Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Megan Rianne WolfU-Conn, Storrs, CT, 06269, USA.
Carlo MassafraDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Rome "La Sapienza", Sant'Andrea Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Andrea RedlerDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Rome "La Sapienza", Sant'Andrea Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035, 00189, Rome, Italy.
Daniele MazzaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Rome "La Sapienza", Sant'Andrea Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035, 00189, Rome, Italy. daniele.mazza@hotmail.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1799-0827
Andrea FerrettiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Rome "La Sapienza", Sant'Andrea Hospital, Via di Grottarossa, 1035, 00189, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to determine the most reliable radiographic measurement method to evaluate PTS as a risk factor for ACL reconstruction failure.

methodsPatients who underwent ACL reconstruction or ACL revision reconstruction between January 2009 and December 2014 by a single surgeon were included. Fifty-two consecutive patients who underwent ACL revision reconstruction were compared to a random selection of 52 patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction and a control group of 52 patients without ACL injury. ACL reconstruction was performed using either ipsilateral (primary) or contralateral (revision) quadrupled hamstring autograft. Lateral knee radiographs were evaluated using three methods: (1) longitudinal axis, (2) anterior tibial cortex axis, and (3) posterior tibial cortex.

resultsA significant difference was found between subjects who underwent ACL reconstruction and control knees (6.79° vs. 5.31°, p = 0.046) using the posterior tibial cortex method. No other statistical significance was found between groups. A multiple linear regression analysis found that the PTS as measured by any method was not affected by the patient's age, sex, height, weight, and BMI. All methods of measurement for PTS demonstrated excellent (ICC > 0.90) intra-rater and inter-rater reliability, but only the posterior tibial cortex method maintained excellent intra-rater and inter-rater reliability (ICC > 0.90) when evaluating patients with ACL revision reconstruction.

conclusionsThe posterior tibial cortex measurement is the most reliable method for analyzing the PTS on lateral knee radiographs in patients undergoing ACL revision reconstruction.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionAnterior Cruciate LigamentHumansKnee JointReproducibility of ResultsTibiaACL reconstruction failureACL reconstruction revisionAnterior cruciate ligamentPosterior tibial slope

Identifiers

PMID33146767

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.