ReviewArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2021
A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Standard Techniques Are Comparable (299 Trials With 25,816 Patients).
Review in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07311031 (Effect of Blood Flow Restriction Training on Quadriceps Muscle Strength, Knee Biomechanics and Rehabilitation After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Active Workers), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Effect of Blood Flow Restriction Training on Quadriceps Muscle Strength, Knee Biomechanics and Rehabilitation After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Active Workers
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Arthroscopic primary repair of the anterior cruciate ligament with internal brace ligament augmentation: a viable alternative to reconstruction? A systematic literature review and analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Long-term results after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using patellar tendon versus hamstring tendon autograft with a minimum follow-up of 10 years-a systematic review.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Wearable Devices for the Quantitative Assessment of Knee Joint Function After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury or Reconstruction: A Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Quadruple Hamstring Autograft Technique for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Reduces Allograft Augmentation.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Acute and subacute anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions are associated with a higher risk of revision and reoperation.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Article
- [Research progress of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with over-the-top technique].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2022Review
- Three orthopaedic operations, over 1,000 randomized controlled trials, in over 100,000 patients : what have we learnt?Bone & joint research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo provide an overview of all published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) summarizing the available evidence.
methodsFollowing PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we searched the Cochrane FIGCentral Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, and Embase for RCTs of ACLR from their inception to August 26, 2020. Outcome measure was whether RCTs reported statistically significant findings. RCTs were then classified according to their intervention groups in a narrative synthesis of the evidence.
resultsIn total, 299 RCTs met the inclusion criteria and were included with a total number of 25,186 patients. Only 30 RCTs (10%) reported significant differences between the intervention and the control groups. These included 101 RCTs on grafts, 20 RCTs on tunnel placements, 48 RCTs on graft fixation, 42 RCTs on single-bundle compared with double-bundle reconstructions, 11 RCTs on additional procedures, 11 RCTs on graft tensioning, 5 RCTs on timing of surgery, 25 RCTs on technical variations from standard techniques, 6 RCTs on ACL repair, 5 RCTs on navigation, 16 RCTs on perioperative management, and 9 RCTs on other aspects of ACLR. Only 14 RCTs (4.7%) reported outcomes beyond 10 years with greater allograft failures compared with autografts, high incidence of osteoarthritic changes in reconstructed knees (22%-100%), with no significant differences in outcomes between bioabsorbable or metal screws for graft fixation, patellar versus hamstrings or single- versus double-bundle reconstructions.
conclusionsThe evidence indicates that a standard arthroscopic single- or double-bundle ACLR with hamstrings/patella autografts, transportal technique, and fixation techniques familiar to the surgeon leads to comparable results. This evidence offers surgeons the flexibility to use standard and cost-effective techniques and achieve comparable outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II; systematic review of Level I-II randomized controlled trials.
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.