Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35154993›Full record

ArticleCureus2022

The Multivariate Relationship Between Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Timing and Revision Rates: A 10-Year Analysis.

Michael Brown, Gage A Hurlburt, Zachary A Koenig, David Richards

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Delaying anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction for more than 3 or 6 months results in lower risk of revision surgery.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2024
    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

4 authors.

Michael BrownMedicine, West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine, Lewisburg, USA.
Gage A HurlburtDepartment of Medicine, West Virginia University School of Medicine, Martinsburg, USA.
Zachary A KoenigSchool of Medicine, West Virginia University, Morgantown, USA.
David RichardsOrthopedics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objective The optimal timing of anterior crucial ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains a matter of controversy. A revision procedure is performed to improve knee function, correct instability, and enable a safe return to daily function when primary ACLR fails. The present study aimed to determine if the timing of primary ACLR is predictive of revision surgery. Methods All patients who underwent primary ACLR at the West Virginia University from January 2008 to December 2018 were identified. Patients were initially grouped into early (≤30 days) and late (>30 days) ACLR based on the onset of the initial injury. The major outcome measure of this study was the incidence of revision ACLR following primary ACLR. Results A total of 233 primary ACLRs were included. The incidence of ACLR revisions was 9.4%. The timing of primary ACLR, when categorized into early and late ACLRs, was not found to influence revision risk (p=0.384). Additionally, the damaged anatomical structures based on the postoperative diagnosis at the time of ACLR did not influence the odds of revision ACLR (p=0.9721). Conclusion Our study found that the timing of primary ACLR did not influence the revision rates when categorizing primary surgery time into early and late subgroups.

Indexed as

anterior crucial ligament injuryanterior cruciate ligamentreconstructionrevisiontiming

Identifiers

PMID35154993
PMCPMC8818616

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.