ReviewEFORT open reviews2023
Anterior cruciate ligament failure and management.
Review in EFORT open reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using a Hollow Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System Semitendinosus Autograft Combined With Anterolateral Complex Augmentation Using Gracilis.Arthroscopy techniques · 2026Article
- What does a failure in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction really mean? An integrative view.Knee surgery & related research · 2026Review
- The 4-Strand Hamstring Overlap Link for All-Inside Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Graft Preparation Technique.Arthroscopy techniques · 2026Article
- Femoral offset aimer use is not associated with improved anatomic accuracy in hamstring ACL reconstruction: A 3D-CT study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of the Addition of Autograft Lateral Extra-Articular Procedures to Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Activity level, kinesiophobia, and sports injury-related anxiety in professional athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Augmented Over-The-Top Technique for Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- The Role of Allografts in Revision ACL Reconstruction.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Observational
- Evaluating drill speed effects on tunnel diameter in ACL reconstruction: Insights from an experimental animal study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Needle-Assisted All-Inside Medial Meniscal Ramp Lesion Repair.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- The Durability of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Comparison of Patients at <5 Years and ≥5 Years After Revision.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2025Article
- Infratuberositary slope-decreasing anterior closed wedge proximal tibial osteotomy is safe and shows rapid bone healing.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Article
- In vivo kinematic analysis of failure cases after nonanatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a preliminary study.Knee surgery & related research · 2024Article
- The presence of a Segond fracture in ACL-injured patients is associated with increased internal tibial rotation on preoperative MRIs.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Conservative treatment versus surgical reconstruction for ACL rupture: A systemic review.Journal of orthopaedics · 2024Review
- Four-year comparative analysis of return to sport and psychological recovery following ACL revision: Artificial ligament vs. anterior tibial tendon allograft.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction failure can be defined as abnormal knee function due to graft insufficiency with abnormal laxity or failure to recreate a functional knee according to the expected outcome. Traumatic ruptures have been reported as the most common reason for failure. They are followed by technical errors, missed concomitant knee injuries, and biological failures. An in-depth preoperative examination that includes a medical history, clinical examinations, advanced imaging, and other appropriate methods is of utmost importance. There is still no consensus as to the ideal graft, but autografts are the favorite choice even in ACL revision. Concomitant meniscal treatment, ligamentous reconstruction, and osteotomies can be performed in the same surgical session to remove anatomical or biomechanical risk factors for the failure. Patient expectations should be managed since outcomes after ACL revision are not as good as those following primary ACL reconstruction.
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.