ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2021
Repair versus reconstruction for proximal anterior cruciate ligament tears: a study protocol for a prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative effectiveness of peroneus longus tendon (PLT) autografts versus hamstring tendon (HT) autografts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comprehensive systematic review and meta analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024Pooled it
- Primary Arthroscopic Repair of Chronic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Primary repair of proximal anterior cruciate ligament injury: a global expert consensus statement.Burns & trauma · 2025Article
- No difference in laxity, proprioception and neuromuscular control after suture-tape augmented ACL repair of acute proximal avulsions versus ACL reconstruction using hamstring autografts in young, active population.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Rate of Revision Surgery and Associated Risk Factors After Primary Arthroscopic ACL Repair With Additional Suture Augmentation.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Cohort study of short-term outcomes after ACL-reconstruction using autograft with internal brace reinforcement versus isolated autograft demonstrating no significant difference.Journal of orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Prospective Comparison of Postoperative Pain and Opioid Consumption Between Primary Repair and Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2023Article
- ACL repair for athletes?Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor active patients with a tear of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) who would like to return to active level of sports, the current surgical gold standard is reconstruction of the ACL. Recently, there has been renewed interest in repairing the ACL in selected patients with a proximally torn ligament. Repair of the ligament has (potential) advantages over reconstruction of the ligament such as decreased surgical morbidity, faster return of range of motion, and potentially decreased awareness of the knee. Studies comparing both treatments in a prospective randomized method are currently lacking.
methodsThis study is a multicenter prospective block randomized controlled trial. A total of 74 patients with acute proximal isolated ACL tears will be assigned in a 1:1 allocation ratio to either (I) ACL repair using cortical button fixation and additional suture augmentation or (II) ACL reconstruction using an all-inside autologous hamstring graft technique. The primary objective is to assess if ACL repair is non-inferior to ACL reconstruction regarding the subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score at two-years postoperatively. The secondary objectives are to assess if ACL repair is non-inferior with regards to (I) other patient-reported outcomes measures (i.e. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Lysholm score, Forgotten Joint Score, patient satisfaction and pain), (II) objective outcome measures (i.e. failure of repair or graft defined as rerupture or symptomatic instability, reoperation, contralateral injury, and stability using the objective IKDC score and Rollimeter/KT-2000), (III) return to sports assessed by Tegner activity score and the ACL-Return to Sports Index at two-year follow-up, and (IV) long-term osteoarthritis at 10-year follow-up. DISCUSSION: Over the last decade there has been a resurgence of interest in repair of proximally torn ACLs. Several cohort studies have shown encouraging short-term and mid-term results using these techniques, but prospective randomized studies are lacking. Therefore, this randomized controlled trial has been designed to assess whether ACL repair is at least equivalent to the current gold standard of ACL reconstruction in both subjective and objective outcome scores.
trial registrationRegistered at Netherlands Trial Register ( NL9072 ) on 25th of November 2020.
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.