Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38001516›Full record

ReviewBMC musculoskeletal disorders2023

Is remnant preservation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction superior to the standard technique? An overview of systematic reviews.

Yunsong Zhang, Xiangyu Xiao, Wei Deng, Jianyu Wang, Hongwei Gao, Jicheng Han

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Yunsong Zhang *Changchun University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, 1035 Boshuo Road, Nanguan District, Changchun City, Jilin Province, China.
Xiangyu Xiao *Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.4655, Changqing University Science and Technology Park, Changqing District, Jinan City, Shandong Province, China.
Wei DengAffiliated Hospital of Changchun University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1478 Gongnong Road, Chaoyang District, Changchun City, Jilin Province, China.
Jianyu WangAffiliated Hospital of Changchun University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1478 Gongnong Road, Chaoyang District, Changchun City, Jilin Province, China.
Hongwei GaoAffiliated Hospital of Changchun University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1478 Gongnong Road, Chaoyang District, Changchun City, Jilin Province, China.
Jicheng HanAffiliated Hospital of Changchun University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1478 Gongnong Road, Chaoyang District, Changchun City, Jilin Province, China. 384052930@qq.com.
Changchun University · CNChangchun University of Chinese Medicine · CNShandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNThe Affiliated Hospital to Changchun University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

Jilin Provincial Traditional Chinese Medicine Science and Technology Project 2022022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnterior cruciate ligament injury is a common knee joint injury. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is a common surgical treatment to treat anterior cruciate ligament injury. It may have certain advantages to retain the ligament stump during the operation, but the results of systematic evaluation on whether to retain the ligament stump are different. The conclusion is still controversial, and the quality needs to be strictly evaluated.

objectiveTo evaluate the methodological quality, risk of bias, reporting quality and evidence quality of the systematic review of remnant preservation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, and to provide reference for clinical work.

methodsWe systematically searched the system evaluations in 8 electronic databases, the languages were limited to Chinese and English, and the time limit was from the establishment of the database to June 2023. Two reviewers independently screened literature and extracted data. The methodological quality, risk of bias, reporting quality and quality of evidence were evaluated by AMSTAR-2, ROBIS, PRISMA and GRADE tools.

resultsA total of 14 systematic reviews were included. The evaluation of results showed that the methodological quality of the included systematic reviews was relatively low, of which 5 were low quality and 9 were critically low quality. A small number of systematic reviews were low risk of bias. The system evaluation reports are relatively complete, but the lack of program registration is a common problem. A total of 111 pieces of clinical evidence were extracted from the included 14 systematic reviews. The quality of evidence was generally low, with only 7 pieces of high-quality evidence, 45 pieces of medium-quality evidence, and the rest were low and very low-quality evidence. Among the reasons for relegation, imprecision is the most common, followed by inconsistency and indirectness. The existing evidence shows that patients after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with remnant preservation have certain advantages in knee joint function, joint stability and proprioception recovery, which may be a more effective surgical method. However, it may also increase the incidence of postoperative complications and adverse reactions.

conclusionCompared with Standard Technique, Remnant Preservation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction has more advantages in restoring joint function and stability and proprioception. But the potential risks should also be considered by surgeons. At present, the quality of evidence is generally low, and the reliability of the conclusion is insufficient. It still needs to be verified and further in-depth research is needed.

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionKnee InjuriesAnterior Cruciate LigamentHumansKnee JointReproducibility of ResultsSystematic Reviews as TopicTreatment OutcomeAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionMeta-analysisOverviewRemnant preservationSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38001516
PMCPMC10668441
OpenAlexW4388975547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.