ArticleJSES international2023
Preoperative and operative risk factors for failed lateral collateral ligament reconstruction.
Article in JSES international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical revision after previous failed lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL) reconstruction and persisting posterolateral rotatory instability (PLRI) of the Elbow: a retrospective multicentric analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- A Novel Surgical Treatment Management Algorithm for Elbow Posterolateral Rotatory Instability (PLRI) Based on the Common Extensor Origin Integrity.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Repair or reconstruction of the lateral collateral ligament (LCL) using autograft or allograft is a well-accepted treatment of posterolateral rotatory instability. The prevalence and causes for failure of LCL reconstruction are not well documented in the literature. Any approach to the assessment and management of failed LCL reconstruction must begin with understanding the risk factors for failure in the first place. Such understanding would likely make many failures preventable as well. In our experience, there are a number of identifiable preoperative risk factors concerning bony and/or soft tissue constraints for failure of LCL reconstruction. There are also operative factors such as tunnel and graft placement as well as excessive lateral condyle stripping that play a role in risk of failure. This report is an attempt to provide a systematic approach to identifying and managing the preoperative and operative risk factors. Further studies are warranted to determine the indications for, and success rates of surgical intervention in managing these risk factors.
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.