Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36597708›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2023

Biomechanical Comparison of Anatomic Versus Lower of Anteromedial and Anterolateral Tibial Tunnels in Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Bo Peng, Yuchen Tang, Gengxin Jia, Bin Geng, Lihu Xu, Yayi Xia, Yuanjun Teng

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Research progress of tibial tunnel positioning techniques in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bo PengDepartment of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730030, China.
Yuchen TangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730030, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5635-6319
Gengxin JiaDepartment of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730030, China.
Bin GengDepartment of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730030, China.
Lihu XuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730030, China.
Yayi XiaDepartment of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730030, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9351-9802
Yuanjun TengDepartment of Orthopaedics, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730030, China.
Lanzhou University Second Hospital · CN

Funding

Lanzhou Science and Technology Plan Project 2021-1-106Medical Innovation and Development Project of Lanzhou University (lzuyxcx-2022-173)National Natural Science Foundation of China 82060413/81874017/81960403/82060405the Cuiying Science and Technology Innovation Project of Lanzhou University Second Hospital CY2019-QN02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn order to reduce the "killer turn" effect, various tibial tunnels have been developed. However, few studies investigated the biomechanical effects of different tibial tunnels during PCL reconstruction. This study aims to compare the time-zero biomechanical properties of anteromedial, anterolateral, lower anteromedial, and lower anterolateral tibial tunnels in transtibial posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction under load-to-failure loading.

methodsPorcine tibias and bovine extensor tendons were used to simulate in vitro transtibial PCL reconstruction. Forty bovine extensor tendons and 40 porcine tibias were randomly divided into four experimental groups: anteromedial tunnel group (AM group, n = 10), anterolateral tunnel group (AL group, n = 10), lower anteromedial tunnel group (L-AM group, n = 10), and lower anterolateral tunnel group (L-AL group, n = 10). The biomechanical test was then carried out in each group using the load-to-failure test. The ultimate load (in newtons), yield load (in newtons), tensile stiffness (in newtons per millimeter), load-elongation curve, failure mode, and tibial tunnel length (in millimeter) were recorded for each specimen. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the mean differences among the four groups.

resultsThe biomechanical outcomes showed that there were no differences in the mean tensile stiffness and failure mode among four groups. The ultimate load and yield load of the L-AM group were significantly higher than those of other three groups (P < 0.05). For the AM group, its ultimate load is significantly higher than that of the L-AL group (P < 0.05), and its yield load is higher than that of the AL group and L-AL group (P < 0.05). However, we found no significant differences in either ultimate load or yield load between AL group and L-AL group (P > 0.05). There was significant statistical difference in the length of tibial tunnel between anatomic groups (AM and AL) and lower groups (L-AM and L-AL) (P < 0.05).

conclusionCompared with the anteromedial, anterolateral, and lower anterolateral tibial tunnel, the lower anteromedial tibial tunnel showed better time-zero biomechanical properties including ultimate load and yield load in transtibial PCL reconstruction.

Indexed as

Posterior Cruciate LigamentPosterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaCattleKnee JointSwineTendonsTibiaPosterior cruciate ligamentTibial tunnelUltimate loadYield loadZero-time biomechanical properties comparison

Identifiers

PMID36597708
PMCPMC9977590
OpenAlexW4313489135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.