Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36434264›Full record

ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2023

Harvesting a second graft from the extensor mechanism for revision ACL reconstruction does not delay return of quadriceps function.

Joshua C Setliff, Christopher M Gibbs, Volker Musahl, Bryson P Lesniak, Jonathan D Hughes, Stephen J Rabuck

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Joshua C SetliffSchool of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, 3200 S Water St, Pittsburgh, PA, 15203, USA. setliffjc@upmc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6674-1579
Christopher M GibbsDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UPMC, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Volker MusahlDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UPMC, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Bryson P LesniakDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UPMC, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Jonathan D HughesDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UPMC, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Stephen J RabuckDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, UPMC, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
University of Pittsburgh · USUPMC Health System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate whether harvesting a second graft from the ipsilateral extensor mechanism adversely affects clinical outcomes in revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.

methodsA retrospective review of 34 patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with either quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft or bone-tendon-bone (BTB) autograft was conducted. Patients with two grafts (BTB+QT) from the extensor mechanism were matched based on age, laterality, and sex to patients who had primary reconstruction with hamstring (HS) autograft followed by revision with either BTB or QT autograft (HS+QT/BTB). Return of quadriceps function was assessed with time to return to jogging in a standardized rehab protocol or time to regain 80% quadriceps strength. Secondary outcomes included International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Marx scores at 12-month follow-up and return to sport.

resultsThere were no significant differences in return to jogging or 80% quadriceps strength (HS 149.5 ± 38.2 days, BTB+QT 131.7 ± 40.1 days, n.s.), number able to return to sport (HS 62%, BTB+QT 93%, n.s.), months to return to sport (HS 10.6 ± 1.4, BTB+QT 10.5 ± 2.3, n.s.), return to pre-injury level of competition (HS 62%, BTB+QT 73%, n.s.), or IKDC (HS 77.2 ± 16.4, BTB+QT 74.8 ± 23.9, n.s.) and Marx scores (HS 9.2 ± 5.3, BTB+QT 8.0 ± 3.7, n.s.) at one-year follow-up.

conclusionThe main finding of the present study was that outcomes for patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction with a second extensor mechanism autograft were comparable to those seen for patients who underwent revision ACL reconstruction with extensor mechanism autograft after primary ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft. By better understanding the consequences of harvesting a second graft from the extensor mechanism, surgeons can better decide what graft to use in revision ACL reconstruction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionHamstring TendonsAnterior Cruciate LigamentAutograftsHumansTendonsTransplantation, AutologousACL reconstructionAnterior cruciate ligamentExtensor mechanismKneeQuadriceps tendon autograftRevision ACL reconstructionSports medicine

Identifiers

PMID36434264
OpenAlexW4310080991

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.