Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37593689›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2023

Cohort study of short-term outcomes after ACL-reconstruction using autograft with internal brace reinforcement versus isolated autograft demonstrating no significant difference.

Rahul Mohan, Tariq Adam Kwaees, Terin Thomas, Ravi Pydisetty

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. [Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026
    Article
  5. [Short-term effectiveness of functional double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with internal brace by helical continuous suture fixation].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rahul MohanMersey and West Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Whiston Hospital, Prescot, L35 5DR, United Kingdom.
Tariq Adam KwaeesMersey and West Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Whiston Hospital, Prescot, L35 5DR, United Kingdom.
Terin ThomasMersey and West Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Whiston Hospital, Prescot, L35 5DR, United Kingdom.
Ravi PydisettyMersey and West Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Whiston Hospital, Prescot, L35 5DR, United Kingdom.
Whiston Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The gold standard treatment for Anterior Cruciate Ligament injury is reconstruction (ACL-R). Graft failure is the concern and ensuring a durable initial graft with rapid integration is crucial. Graft augmentation with implantable devices (internal brace reinforcement) is a technique purported to reduce the risk of rupture and hasten recovery. Few studies have examined these techniques, in particular when compared to non-augmented grafts. This study assesses the short-term outcome of ACL-R using augmented and non-augmented hamstring tendon autografts. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study comparing augmented and non-augmented ACL-R. All procedures were performed in a single centre using the same technique. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS] was used to assess patient-reported outcomes. Results: There were 70 patients in the augmented and 111 patients in the control group. Mean graft diameter in the augmented group was 8.82 mm versus 8.44 mm in the non-augmented. Six strand graft was achievable in 73.5% of the augmented group compared to 33% in the non-augmented group. Two graft failures were reported in the non-augmented group and none in the augmented group. Patient satisfaction rates were higher in the augmented group. There was a statistically insignificant improvement in the postoperative KOOS in the augmented group compared to the non-augmented group (p 0.6). Irrespective of augmentation status, no correlation was found between the functional score and age, or femoral tunnel width. Conclusion: No statistically significant difference was demonstrated in the short-term functional outcome of ACL reconstruction using an augmented or non-augmented hamstring graft. Augmented ACL-R may achieve superior graft diameters, failure rates and patient reported outcomes when compared to nonaugmented ACL-R. Prospective trials are needed to examine this further.

Indexed as

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructionHamstring autograftInternal braceShort-term outcomes

Identifiers

PMID37593689
PMCPMC10429725
OpenAlexW4385383245

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.