Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35105587›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2022

RetroBRACE: clinical, socioeconomic and functional-biomechanical outcomes 2 years after ACL repair and InternalBrace augmentation in comparison to ACL reconstruction and healthy controls-experimental protocol of a non-randomised single-centre comparative study.

Sebastian Müller, Linda Bühl, Corina Nüesch, Geert Pagenstert, Annegret Mündermann, Christian Egloff

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Functional leg performance 2 years after ACL surgery: a comparison between InternalBrace™-augmented repair versus reconstruction versus healthy controls.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sebastian Müller *Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland sebastian.mueller@unibas.ch.ORCID 0000-0001-5842-7371
Linda Bühl *Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Corina NüeschDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7526-9536
Geert PagenstertDepartment of Clinical Research, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Annegret MündermannDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-6472-1689
Christian EgloffDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
University of Basel · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite good clinical outcomes reported in the literature, to date, scientific evidence for the functional and biomechanical benefit of primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) repair with augmentation is scarce. We present an experimental protocol for a detailed multimodal (clinical, socioeconomic, functional and biomechanical) comparative study in patients after primary ACL repair and InternalBrace augmentation, patients after ACL reconstruction and healthy controls. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this non-randomised single-centre comparative study with prospective data collection with three arms (patients 2 years after ACL repair and InternalBrace augmentation; patients 2 years after ACL reconstruction using hamstring autografts; and healthy controls), 30 participants per study arm will be included. The study is designed as non-inferiority study with three arms. Required sample size was estimated based on data reported in the literature on muscle strength, proprioception and balance parameters, resulting in at least 28 participants per group. Outcome parameters include patient-reported outcome measures (EQ-5D-5L, Tegner Activity Scale, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee and ACL-Return to Sports Injury Scale), socio-economic parameters, anterior tibial translation, range of motion and functional-biomechanical data of the lower extremities. Functional-biomechanical parameters include proprioception, isokinetic muscle strength, single-leg balance, walking, running and single-leg hops with additional lower extremity 3D joint kinematics and kinetics and muscle activity. These parameters will be compared between limbs in patients, between groups and to the current literature. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences. Ethical approval was obtained by the regional ethics board (Ethics Committee Northwest Switzerland EKNZ 2020-00551), and the study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov.Trial registration numberNCT04429165.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionAnterior Cruciate LigamentHumansKnee JointNon-Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicSocioeconomic FactorsTreatment Outcomekneeorthopaedic sports traumaorthopaedic & trauma surgerysurgery

Identifiers

PMID35105587
PMCPMC8808437
OpenAlexW4210257181

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.