ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2022
MRI Does Not Reliably Detect Kaplan Fiber Injury In Skeletally Immature Patients with an Acute ACL Tear.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between Kaplan fiber injury and anterolateral tibial subluxation in patients with anterior cruciate ligament injury.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2026Article
- Kaplan fibers of iliotibial band: a comprehensive review of current literature.EFORT open reviews · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To our knowledge, there have been no previous efforts to evaluate the prevalence of Kaplan fiber (KF) injury in skeletally immature patients with an acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) nor has there been any comparison of the reliability of previously described KF diagnostic criteria in this cohort. Purpose: To define the prevalence of KF injury in the setting of acute ACL tears using MRI performed within 90 days of injury among skeletally immature patients, and to compare the reliability of MRI in detecting KF injuries using 2 previously described diagnostic criteria. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Skeletally immature patients with an acute ACL tear confirmed using MRI within 90 days of injury were assessed. Two fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologists independently interpreted each MRI scan twice. KF injury was first assessed using the Van Dyck scheme (grade 0, normal; grade 1, periligamentous; grade 2, partial tear; and grade 3, complete tear). MRI scans were then reviewed again using the KF injury criteria proposed by Batty. Discrepancies in KF injury schemes were adjudicated by a third musculoskeletal radiologist. Interrater agreement for both methods was determined using Cohen κ. Results: Included were 45 patients (33 male, 12 female) with a mean age of 13.2 ± 1.6 years. KF injuries were identified in 17 of 45 (37.7%) knees of using the traditional Van Dyck grading scheme (interrater agreement κ = 0.40). The Batty diagnostic criteria identified KF injury in 5 of 45 (11.1%) (interrater agreement κ = 0.45); 17 (37.8%) MRI scans required a third reviewer adjudication for the Van Dyck scheme, while 4 (8.9%) required a third reviewer using the Batty criteria. Conclusion: The Batty diagnostic criteria detected a lower KF injury prevalence than previously reported in the adult population, while the Van Dyck prevalence was similar to rates in adult populations. Both grading criteria had poor interrater reliability in diagnosing a KF injury.
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.