Trial reportBMC surgery2023
Two-stage ligament reconstruction with remnant preservation as treatment of knee dislocation.
Trial report in BMC surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single-Stage vs. Multi-Stage Reconstruction in Multi-Ligament Knee Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes and Complications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Graft Options for the Reconstruction of Multi-ligament Knee Injury: A Systematic Review.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2025Review
- A rare concomitant ipsilateral hip and knee dislocations: A case report and review of the literature.SAGE open medical case reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of two-stage reconstruction (peripheral reconstruction in phase I and central anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) / posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstruction in phase II) with remnant preservation for patients with knee dislocation.
methodsA total of 70 patients (10 IIIM, 17 IIIL, and 43 IV) with knee dislocation were randomly divided into the remnant-preserved group and the simple reconstruction group. Patients underwent two-stage reconstruction, including the reconstruction of collateral ligament in phase I and the reconstruction of ACL/PCL in phase II (12 weeks after phase I). Grafts were harvested from the semitendinosus and gracilis tendons from both lower limbs. After the surgery, the joint flexion and extension, bone tunnel and ligament healing, and joint stability were evaluated.
resultsAfter the surgery, the lateral stability recovered in all patients, and X-ray revealed a good position of bone tunnel. Follow-up was performed at 12 months postoperatively and ranged from 24 to 91 months. At the final follow-up, knee flexion angle, IKDC, Lysholm, and Tegner scores were all higher in both groups compared to the preoperative period. Notably, the remnant-preserved group showed superior results in these parameters compared to the simple reconstruction group. There was statistical significance between the two groups in terms of the Lachman test.
conclusionThe knee function was well recovered after two-stage ligament reconstruction with remnant preservation.
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.