Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35682357›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Strength Recovery Measured by Isokinetic Dynamometer Technology after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Quadriceps Tendon Autografts vs. Hamstring Tendon Autografts or Patellar Tendon Autografts.

Fahed Herbawi, Mario Lozano-Lozano, Maria Lopez-Garzon, Paula Postigo-Martin, Lucia Ortiz-Comino, Jose Luis Martin-Alguacil, Manuel Arroyo-Morales, Carolina Fernandez-Lao

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
9.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Sport-specific differences in ACL injury, treatment and return to sports: Football.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fahed HerbawiDepartment of Physical Therapy, Health Science Faculty, University of Granada, Avda de la Ilustración 60, 18016 Granada, Spain.
Mario Lozano-LozanoDepartment of Physical Therapy, Health Science Faculty, University of Granada, Avda de la Ilustración 60, 18016 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-5854-3567
Maria Lopez-GarzonDepartment of Physical Therapy, Health Science Faculty, University of Granada, Avda de la Ilustración 60, 18016 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-9229-9673
Paula Postigo-MartinDepartment of Physical Therapy, Health Science Faculty, University of Granada, Avda de la Ilustración 60, 18016 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-6430-5207
Lucia Ortiz-CominoDepartment of Physical Therapy, Health Science Faculty, University of Granada, Avda de la Ilustración 60, 18016 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2710-8890
Jose Luis Martin-AlguacilDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Andalusian Mutuality of Soccer Players and Martín Gómez Clinic, 18005 Granada, Spain.
Manuel Arroyo-MoralesDepartment of Physical Therapy, Health Science Faculty, University of Granada, Avda de la Ilustración 60, 18016 Granada, Spain.
Carolina Fernandez-LaoDepartment of Physical Therapy, Health Science Faculty, University of Granada, Avda de la Ilustración 60, 18016 Granada, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-9392-1532
Universidad de Granada · ESAndalusian Health Service · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis systematic review and meta-analysis compared the isokinetic strength of the muscular knee joint between quadriceps tendon autografts (QTAs) and hamstring tendon autografts (HTAs) or patellar tendon autografts (PTAs) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction by determining the isokinetic angular velocity and follow-up time points. The functional outcomes and knee stability at the same time points were also compared using isokinetic technology.

methodsTwo independent reviewers searched the Medline (via PubMed search engine), Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases to include full text comparative studies that assessed isokinetic strength test following ACL reconstruction. The DerSimonian and Laird method was used.

resultsIn total, ten studies were included; seven compared studies QTAs vs. HTAs, and three compared QTAs vs. PTAs. Five studies were included in the meta-analysis. Isokinetic strength data were reported 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after ACL reconstruction.

conclusionsThe QTAs showed better and significant results with knee flexion compared with HTAs, similar results to PTAs at 6 and 12 months. While HTAs showed better and significant results with knee extension at 6 months and similar results at 12 months compared to QTAs. Furthermore, a standardized isokinetic strength test must be followed to achieve a more specific conclusion and better clinical comparison among participants.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionHamstring TendonsPatellar LigamentAutograftsHumansTechnologyTendonsanterior cruciate ligament reconstructionisokinetic testquadriceps tendon autograft

Identifiers

PMID35682357
PMCPMC9180841
OpenAlexW4281640430

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.