ArticleActa ortopedica brasileira2023
ANTEROMEDIAL OR CENTRAL ANATOMIC ACL RECONSTRUCTION? A CADAVERIC HIP-TO-TOE STUDY.
Article in Acta ortopedica brasileira, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare anatomic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction between two tunnel positions in knees with isolated ligament tears. Methods: Anatomic ACL reconstruction was performed, from hip-to-toe, on 15 fresh cadaveric specimens. No associated lesions were created to enhance knee instability. The protocol was conducted in three states: (1) complete isolated ACL deficiency; (2) anatomic femoral and tibial anteromedial ACL reconstruction (AM REC); and (3) anatomic femoral and tibial central ACL reconstruction (Central REC). The reconstruction protocols were randomly assigned. The continuous mechanized pivot-shift test was recorded dynamically with a tracking system. Results: The Central REC group showed a smaller degree of internal rotation (0.6° ± 0.3° vs. 1.8° ± 0.3°, respectively, P < 0.05) and no difference in anterior translation (4.7 mm ± 0.4 mm vs. 4.5 mm ± 0.4 mm, respectively, P > 0.05) in the pivot-shift test, compared with the AM REC group. Conclusion: The central anatomic ACL reconstruction resulted in greater restriction of internal rotation than the anteromedial anatomic 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.