ArticleMalaysian orthopaedic journal2023
Comparison of Outcomes Between All-Inside Single-Bundle and Double-Bundle Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Malaysian orthopaedic journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- All-inside single-bundle and modified double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction techniques guarantee stability and similar clinical results at over 5 year follow-up.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: ACL rupture is the most common type of knee injury. The All-inside ACL reconstruction procedure features some distinguished components including closed-socket tunnels with less bone expulsion, double suspensory fixation, and smaller incisions. We aimed to compare the outcomes between the All-inside Single-bundle and the Double-bundle ACL reconstruction techniques. Materials and methods: This study was a retrospective study which analysed the patient-reported and the clinical outcomes on patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between January and December 2020 at Dr Kariadi General Hospital Semarang, Indonesia. We compared the patient-reported and the clinical outcomes at 6- and 12-month follow-ups between the All-inside Single-bundle and the Double-bundle groups. The patient-reported outcomes were determined using the IKDC and Tegner-Lysholm scores while the clinical outcomes included the measurement of Thigh Circumference, Single Hop test, Anterior Drawer test, Lachman test, Range of motion, and the patient's level of return to sport. Results: A total of 24 subjects were divided into two groups, namely the All-inside Single-bundle and the Double-bundle groups, consisting of 12 subjects in each group. Most of the subjects were male in both groups, including 9 (75%) subjects in the All-inside Single-bundle group, and 11 (91.67%) subjects in the Double-bundle group. The mean age of the subjects were 25.75±7.57 years old in the All-inside Single-bundle group, and 24.5±6.87 years old in the Double-bundle group. In terms of the side of the knee that suffered the most injuries in both groups were the right knees. The result of the patient-reported outcomes using IKDC and Tegner-Lysholm scores showed no statistically significant differences in both groups at 6- and 12-month follow-ups (p=0.864; p=0.293 and p=0.589; p=0.233, respectively). The results of clinical assessments at 6- and 12-month follow-ups also showed no statistically significant differences in both groups. Conclusion: Our study showed no significant differences in the patient-reported and the clinical outcomes between the All-inside Single-bundle and the Double-bundle ACL reconstruction techniques at 6- and 12-month follow-ups.
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.