Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33403206›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2020

Return to Sport After ACL Reconstruction With a BTB Versus Hamstring Tendon Autograft: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Matthew W DeFazio, Emily J Curry, Michael J Gustin, David C Sing, Hussein Abdul-Rassoul, Richard Ma, Freddie Fu, Xinning Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
12.7field-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

73 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 133 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. High variability and lack of standardization in the evaluation of return to sport after ACL reconstruction: a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Matthew W DeFazioDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Emily J CurryBoston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Michael J GustinDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
David C SingDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Hussein Abdul-RassoulDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Richard MaMissouri Orthopaedic Institute, Columbia, Missouri, USA.
Freddie FuUniversity of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Xinning LiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Boston University · USBoston Medical Center · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears are debilitating injuries frequently suffered by athletes. ACL reconstruction is indicated to restore knee stability and allow patients to return to prior levels of athletic performance. While existing literature suggests that patient-reported outcomes are similar between bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) and hamstring tendon (HT) autografts, there is less information comparing return-to-sport (RTS) rates between the 2 graft types. PURPOSE: To compare RTS rates among athletes undergoing primary ACL reconstruction using a BTB versus HT autograft. STUDY

designSystematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

methodsThe MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched, and studies that reported on RTS after primary ACL reconstruction using a BTB or HT autograft were included. Studies that utilized ACL repair techniques, quadriceps tendon autografts, graft augmentation, double-bundle autografts, allografts, or revision ACL reconstruction were excluded. RTS information was extracted and analyzed from all included studies.

resultsIncluded in the review were 20 articles investigating a total of 2348 athletes. The overall RTS rate in our cohort was 73.2%, with 48.9% returning to preinjury levels of performance and a rerupture rate of 2.4%. The overall RTS rate in patients after primary ACL reconstruction with a BTB autograft was 81.0%, with 50.0% of athletes returning to preinjury levels of performance and a rerupture rate of 2.2%. Patients after primary ACL reconstruction with an HT autograft had an overall RTS rate of 70.6%, with 48.5% of athletes returning to preinjury levels of performance and a rerupture rate of 2.5%.

conclusionACL reconstruction using BTB autografts demonstrated higher overall RTS rates when compared with HT autografts. However, BTB and HT autografts had similar rates of return to preinjury levels of performance and rerupture rates. Less than half of the athletes were able to return to preinjury sport levels after ACL reconstruction with either an HT or BTB autograft.

Indexed as

allograftanterior cruciate ligament reconstructionanterior cruciate ligament rupturebone–patellar tendon–bone autografthamstring tendon autograftreturn to sport

Identifiers

PMID33403206
PMCPMC7745570
OpenAlexW3112342970

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.