Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36866320›Full record

ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2023

Lateral Extra-Articular Tenodesis Staple Risks Penetration of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Tunnel.

Thomas E Moran, Ian S MacLean, Gregory R Anderson, Laurel A Barras, Ryan M Graf, David R Diduch, Mark D Miller

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Thomas E MoranDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S.A.
Ian S MacLeanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S.A.
Gregory R AndersonDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S.A.
Laurel A BarrasDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S.A.
Ryan M GrafDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S.A.
David R DiduchDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S.A.
Mark D MillerDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia Medical Center, Charlottesville, Virginia, U.S.A.
University of Virginia Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To identify the risk of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) femoral tunnel penetration with the use of a staple for lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) graft fixation and to determine whether this varied between 2 different techniques for ACL femoral tunnel drilling. Methods: Twenty paired, fresh-frozen, cadaver knees underwent ACL reconstruction with a LET. Left and right knees were randomized to ACL reconstruction with femoral tunnel creation by use of either a rigid guide pin and reamer through the accessory anteromedial portal or by the use of a flexible guide pin and reamer through the anteromedial portal. Immediately after tunnel creation, the LET was performed and fixated with a small Richard's staple. Fluoroscopy was used to obtain a lateral view of the knee to determine staple position, and visualization of the ACL femoral tunnel was performed with the arthroscope to investigate penetration of the staple into the femoral tunnel. The Fisher exact test was conducted to determine whether there was any difference in tunnel penetration between tunnel creation techniques. Results: The staple was noted to penetrate the ACL femoral tunnel in 8 of 20 (40%) extremities. When stratified by tunnel creation technique, the Richards staple violated 5 of 10 (50%) of the tunnels made via the rigid reaming technique compared with 3 of 10 (30%) of those created with a flexible guide pin and reamer ( Conclusions: A high incidence of femoral tunnel violation is seen with lateral extra-articular tenodesis staple fixation. Level of Evidence: Level IV, controlled laboratory study. Clinical Relevance: The risk of penetrating the ACL femoral tunnel with a staple for LET graft fixation is not well understood. Yet, the integrity of the femoral tunnel is important for the success of ACL reconstruction. Surgeons can use the information in this study to consider adjustments to operative technique, sequence, or fixation devices used when performing ACL reconstruction with concomitant LET to avoid the potential for disruption of ACL graft fixation.

Identifiers

PMID36866320
PMCPMC9971869
OpenAlexW4312118235

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.