Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36705690›Full record

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

Persistent knee extension deficits are common after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Corey Scholes, Nalan Ektas, Meredith Harrison-Brown, Maha Jegatheesan, Ashwin Rajesh, Garry Kirwan, Christopher Bell

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Double plating versus nail-plate construct in AO 33C distal femur fractures: treatment choice affects knee alignment, clinical outcomes, and quality of life-a multicenter study.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2025
    Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. [Research progress of tibial-graft fixation methods on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2023
    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.

Corey ScholesEBM Analytics, Crows Nest, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6592-0738
Nalan EktasEBM Analytics, Crows Nest, NSW, Australia.
Meredith Harrison-BrownEBM Analytics, Crows Nest, NSW, Australia.
Maha JegatheesanOrthopaedics Department, Queen Elizabeth II Jubilee Hospital, Coopers Plains, QLD, Australia.
Ashwin RajeshOrthopaedics Department, Queen Elizabeth II Jubilee Hospital, Coopers Plains, QLD, Australia.
Garry KirwanPhysiotherapy Department, Queen Elizabeth II Jubilee Hospital, Coopers Plains, QLD, Australia.
Christopher BellOrthopaedics Department, Queen Elizabeth II Jubilee Hospital, Coopers Plains, QLD, Australia. Christopher.Bell@health.qld.gov.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeKnee extension deficits complicate recovery from ACL injury and reconstruction; however, the incidence of knee extension loss is not well defined. The aim of this review was to identify the incidence of loss of extension (LOE) following ACL rupture and reconstruction, explore the definitions of knee extension deficits reported and identify prognostic factors affecting LOE incidence.

methodsA systematic search was conducted in Medline, Cochrane Library and PEDro for studies in publication up to November 2021, with no restrictions on publication year. References were screened and assessed for inclusion using predetermined eligibility criteria. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that quantified knee angle, loss of extension or incidence of extension deficit were included for quality assessment and data extraction. Statistical summaries were generated and meta-analyses performed in two parts to examine: (i) the probability of a datapoint being zero incidence compared to a nonzero incidence and (ii) the relationship between the predictors and nonzero LOE incidence.

resultsA sample of 15,494 studies were retrieved using the search criteria, with 53 studies meeting eligibility criteria. The pooled results from 4991 participants were included for analysis, with 4891 participants who had undergone ACLR. The proportion of included studies judged at an overall low risk of bias was small (7.8%). The observed group and study were the most important predictors for whether a datapoint reported an incidence of extension deficit. Time to follow-up (P < 0.001) and graft type (P = 0.02) were found to have a significant influence on nonzero LOE incidence (%). Covariate adjusted estimates of average LOE indicated 1 in 3 patients presenting with LOE at 12 month follow-up, reducing to 1 in 4 at 2 years.

conclusionsThis review examined the definitions for the measurement and interpretation of postoperative knee extension and established the trajectory of knee extension deficit after ACL injury and reconstruction. While factors associated with loss of extension were identified, the exact trajectory of knee extension deficits was difficult to infer due to discrepancies in measurement techniques and patient variation. On average, 1 in 3 patients may present with loss of extension of at least 3 degrees at 12-month follow-up, decreasing to 1 in 4 at 2 years. These results may be used by clinicians as an upper threshold for acceptable complication rates following ACLR. Future work should focus on LOE as a clinically relevant complication of ACL injury and treatment with appropriate attention to standardisation of definitions, measurements and better understanding of natural history. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018092295. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionHumansIncidenceKnee JointRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicACLRAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionKnee extensionPostoperative range of motion

Identifiers

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.