ArticleCureus2022
Comparison of Inside-Out and Outside-In Methods of Femoral Tunnel Preparation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Reconstruction Using 3D-CT.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Usefulness of 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography Assessment of Femoral Tunnel after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Femoral Tunnel Geometry and Graft Inclination Angles in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using a Flexible Reamer System.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction techniques continue to evolve and the need to address the more anatomical femoral tunnel placement of the graft is critical, and in our study, we assessed the placement of femoral tunnel via transportal and retrograde drilling techniques. Material and methods Sixty patients where n=31 for retrograde, n=29 for transportal were assessed via CT knee for the femoral tunnel aperture on the intercondylar ridge via high low and deep shallow direction ratio and interpreted accordingly. Results In our study, the femoral tunnel done via transportal method (n=29) has a deep shallow ratio range of 22%-47% and mean of 31.9±6.5, and graft is anatomical in 79%. The femoral tunnel done via the retrograde method (n=31) has a deep shallow depth ratio range of 11%-41% with a mean of 27.5±6.5 and graft is anatomical in 77% of the study group and the p-value means the ratio is 0.01 (significant). The femoral tunnel done via transportal method (n=29) has a high low ratio range of 19%-45% and mean of 32.9±6.3 and graft is anatomical in 72%. The femoral tunnel done via the retrograde method (n=31) has a deep shallow depth ratio range of 20%-38% with a mean of 33.9±4.1 and graft is anatomical in 94% of the study group with a p-value mean ratio being 0.51 (insignificant). Conclusion Watch out for the femoral tunnel placement in a deep shallow direction while going for standard transportal technique and high low direction while performing retrograde technique.
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.