ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Dynamic Ultrasound Assessment of the Anterior Tibial Translation for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears Diagnostic.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Accuracy and Reliability of Dynamic Handheld Ultrasound Testing in Detecting Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears: A Cadaveric Study.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2025Article
- Evaluating Neutrophil Gelatinase-Associated Lipocalin in Pediatric CKD: Correlations with Renal Function and Mineral Metabolism.Pediatric reports · 2024Article
- Point-of-Care Ultrasound for the Evaluation and Management of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Magnetic resonance imaging combined with histological evaluation of repair process using the microfracture technique in an association of osteocartilaginous and meniscal surgically induced lesions of the knee. In vivo experiment on a rabbit model.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of our study was to investigate the accuracy of dynamic ultrasound assessment of the anterior tibial translation, in diagnosing anterior cruciate ligament tears, and to assess its test−retest reliability. Twenty-three patients (32 ± 8.42 years; 69.56% males) with a history of knee trauma and knee instability participated in the study. Knee ultrasound was performed by an experienced orthopedic surgeon. The anterior tibial translation was measured in both knees and differences between the injured and uninjured knee were calculated. Side-to-side differences > 1 mm were considered a positive diagnosis of an ACL tear. The anterior tibial translation values were 3.34 ± 1.48 mm in injured knees and 0.86 ± 0.78 mm in uninjured knees. Side-to-side differences > 1 mm were found in 22 cases (95.65%). The diagnosis accuracy was 91.30% (95%CI: 71.96−98.92%) and sensitivity 95.45% (95%CI: 77.15−99.88%). The intraclass correlation coefficient showed an excellent test−retest reliability (ICC3,1 = 0.97 for the side-to-side difference in anterior tibial translation). The study highlights the accuracy and reliability of the dynamic ultrasound assessment of the anterior tibial translation in the diagnosis of unilateral anterior cruciate ligament tears. Ultrasound assessment is an accessible imaging tool that can provide valuable information and should be used together with physical examination in suspected cases of ACL injuries.
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.