Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35464814›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedics

ACL repair for athletes?

Anshu Shekhar, Anoop Pilar, K M Ponnanna, Sachin Tapasvi

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Arthroscopic ACL repair with suture tape augmentation: clinical, functional, and gait analysis outcomes at minimum 3-year follow-up.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Article
  7. 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anshu ShekharArthroscopy and Arthroplasty Sushrut OrthoPlastic Clinic, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India.
Anoop PilarDepartment of Orthopaedics, St. John's Medical College and Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
K M PonnannaDepartment of Orthopaedics, M.S. Ramaiah College and Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
Sachin TapasviThe Orthopaedic Speciality Clinic, Pune, India.
M.S. Ramaiah Medical College · INSt.John's Medical College Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The current gold standard treatment for an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear in an athlete is an arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with autografts. This restores the knee stability but is associated with unique complications like graft re-tear, kinesiophobia and graft donor site morbidity. ACL suture repair (ACLSR) is an attractive alternative method of surgical management of this injury. Current science of ACLSR: The potential advantages of performing a repair are the preservation of native biology and proprioceptive function of ACL, elimination of a graft and preservation of bone stock. The purported benefits are better stability, reduction of kinesiophobia and faster rehabilitation. ACLSR is now performed only for proximal (femoral-sided) tears in the acute phase, when the tissue quality is good and using high-strength nonabsorbable sutures. There are several techniques for performing ACLSR but broadly speaking are either non-augmented, static augmented with suture tape, dynamic augmented or using bio-scaffolds. Clinical outcome of ACLSR: There is a lot of literature on ACLSRs including case series, cohort studies and randomized controlled trials. The results from these studies are encouraging but mostly pertain to patient reported outcome measures, are in small numbers and in the short-term. The results are also inconsistent across different studies and not specifically performed for the athletic population. Moreover, most of these studies are from the innovator or designer surgeons and groups and have not been independently validated. Conclusion: Currently, there is insufficient evidence to recommend ACLSR as a preferred method of managing even acute proximal tears in athletes. Improved rates of return to sports, lower retear rate and lesser kinesiophobia needs to be proven in athletes.

Indexed as

ACL ReconstructionACL RepairAnterior cruciate ligamentAthletesReturn to sports

Identifiers

PMID35464814
PMCPMC9018522
OpenAlexW4224250836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.