ArticleJournal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology2023
Functional leg performance 2 years after ACL surgery: a comparison between InternalBrace™-augmented repair versus reconstruction versus healthy controls.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04429165 (RetroBRACE II), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
RetroBRACE II: Clinical and Functional Outcomes 2 Years After ACL Repair and InternalBrace Ligament Augmentation in Comparison With ACL Reconstruction - Considering Socioeconomic Aspects and Return to Work
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Lateral Extra-Articular Procedures: A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- Simultaneous patellar tendon and anterior cruciate ligament rupture: a systematic review, meta-analysis and algorithmic approach.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Knee proprioception following anterior cruciate ligament repair and reconstruction: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Asia-Pacific journal of sports medicine, arthroscopy, rehabilitation and technology · 2026Review
- Postural stability impairments in non-athletic individuals after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cross-sectional study.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- [Repair of proximal anterior cruciate ligament tears and internal brace augmentation : Technical note].Operative Orthopadie und Traumatologie · 2025Review
- Second revision of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using achilles tendon allograft: a case series of 20 patients at mid-term follow-up.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2025Article
- Landing Biomechanics in Patients 2 Years After Augmented ACL Repair and 2 Years After Hamstring Autograft ACL Reconstruction Compared With Controls.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2025Article
- No difference in laxity, proprioception and neuromuscular control after suture-tape augmented ACL repair of acute proximal avulsions versus ACL reconstruction using hamstring autografts in young, active population.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Ambulatory knee biomechanics and muscle activity 2 years after ACL surgery: InternalBraceBMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhile clinical and patient-reported outcomes have been investigated in patients after InternalBrace™-augmented anterior cruciate ligament repair (ACL-IB), less is known regarding restoration of functional performance. We aimed to determine differences in functional performance within and between patients 2 years after ACL-IB, patients 2 years after ACL reconstruction (ACL-R), and healthy controls. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 29 ACL-IB, 27 ACL-R (hamstring autograft), and 29 controls performed single-leg hop (maximum forward distance hop, SLH; side hop > 40 cm in 30 s, SH), proprioception (knee joint position sense at 30° and 60° flexion), and dynamic postural balance (Y Balance) tests. Differences were calculated within groups (side-to-side difference) and between the involved leg of patients and the non-dominant leg of controls, and were evaluated to predefined statistical (P < 0.05), clinically relevant, and methodological (smallest detectable change) thresholds. The number of exceeded thresholds represented no (0), small (1), moderate (2), or strong (3) differences. In addition, the relative number of participants achieving leg symmetry (≥ 90%) and normal performance (≥ 90% of the average performance of the non-dominant leg of controls) were compared between groups (chi-squared tests, P < 0.05).
resultsWe observed no-to-moderate leg differences within ACL-IB (moderate difference in hops) and within ACL-R (moderate difference in knee proprioception), no leg differences between patient groups, no-to-small leg differences between ACL-IB and controls, and no leg differences between ACL-R and controls in functional performance. However, two patients in ACL-IB and ACL-R, respectively, passed the hop pretest only with their uninvolved leg, and fewer patients after ACL-IB and ACL-R than controls reached a leg symmetry and normal leg performance of controls in SLH (P < 0.001).
conclusionsFunctional performance seems to be comparable 2 years postoperatively between ACL-IB and ACL-R for a specific subgroup of patients (i.e., proximal ACL tears, moderate activity level). However, the presumed advantage of comparable functional outcome with preserved knee structures after augmented ACL repair compared with ACL-R, and the tendency of both patient groups toward leg asymmetry and compromised single-leg hop performance in the involved legs, warrants further investigation. Level of Evidence Level III, case-control study. Trial registration clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04429165 (12/09/2020). Prospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04429165 .
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.