Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33486558›Full record

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

ACL Study Group survey reveals the evolution of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction graft choice over the past three decades.

Markus P Arnold, Jacob G Calcei, Nicole Vogel, Robert A Magnussen, Mark Clatworthy, Tim Spalding, John D Campbell, John A Bergfeld, Seth L Sherman, ACL Study Group

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 98 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed, 6 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

98 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

38 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

10 authors.

Markus P ArnoldPractice LEONARDO, Hirslanden Clinic Birshof, Münchenstein, Switzerland.
Jacob G CalceiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals of Cleveland, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Nicole VogelPractice LEONARDO, Hirslanden Clinic Birshof, Münchenstein, Switzerland.
Robert A MagnussenDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Mark ClatworthyDepartment of Orthopaedics, Middlemore Hospital, Otahuhu, Auckland, New Zealand.
Tim SpaldingDepartment of Orthopaedics, University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK.
John D CampbellBridger Orthopedics and Sports Medicine, PC, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, USA.
John A BergfeldDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Seth L ShermanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, CA, USA. shermans@stanford.edu.
ACL Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAnterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) aims to restore knee function and stability, allowing patients to return to the activities they enjoy and minimize further injury to the meniscus and cartilage and their ultimate progression to osteoarthritis. This study aims to present the evolution of graft choice over the last three decades according to members of the ACL Study Group (SG).

methodsPrior to the January 2020 ACL SG biannual meeting, a survey was administered consisting of 87 questions and 16 categories, including ACLR graft choice. A similar questionnaire has been administered prior to each meeting and survey results from the past 14 meetings (1992 through 2020, excluding 1994) are included in this work. Survey responses are reported as frequencies in percentages to quantify changes in practice over the surgery period.

resultsIn 1992, the most frequent graft choice for primary ACLR was bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) autograft, at nearly 90%. Hamstring tendon (HT) autografts have increased in popularity, currently over 50%, followed by just under 40% BTB autograft. Recently, quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft has increased in popularity since 2014.

conclusionAutograft (HT, BTB, QT) is an overwhelming favorite for primary ACLR over allograft. The preference for HT autograft increased over the study period relative to BTB autograft, with QT autograft gaining in popularity in recent years. Graft selection should be individualized for each patient and understanding the global trends in graft choice can help orthopaedic surgeons discuss graft options with their patients and determine the appropriate graft for each case. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, Expert Opinion.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionHamstring TendonsAutograftsCohort StudiesHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesTransplantation, Autologous

Identifiers

PMID33486558

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.