ReviewOpen access journal of sports medicine2024
Evaluation of Failed ACL Reconstruction: An Updated Review.
Review in Open access journal of sports medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Lateral Extra-Articular Procedures: A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Pooled it
- Superior accuracy of femoral bone tunnel drilling in robot-assisted anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Trial
- Differences in the collagen of semitendinosus tendon in patients with and without general joint laxity.Bone & joint research · 2026Article
- Critical dialogue: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: evolving surgical concepts and their radiological implications.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- [Mechanisms and applications of magnesium ion-regulated stem cell functions in promoting tendon-bone interface healing].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2026Review
- Osteoinductive and Biocompatibility Assessment of a 3D-Printed Polymeric-Hydroxyapatite Composite Interference Screw.Polymers · 2026Article
- Outcomes of Isolated Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis for Residual Laxity Following ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Review
- Intermediate Duration Outcomes After Hamstring Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Comparing Adolescents With and Without Suture Tape Reinforcement.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026Article
- Beyond the ACL: The Hidden Impact of Ramp Tears on Knee Stability.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2026Review
- 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
- Functional Bracing After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions: A Review of the Current Literature.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2025Review
- Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Double Extra-Articular Reinforcement.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Marker-Less Navigation System for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction with 3D Femoral Analysis and Arthroscopic Guidance.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Surgical Robots Improve Tunnel Angle and Graft Bending Angle in Anatomic ACL Reconstruction: A Multicenter Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- One-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Preoperative evaluation, planning and surgical techniques. A review of current concepts.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Failure rates among primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR) range from 3.2% to 11.1%. Recently, there has been increased focus on surgical and anatomic considerations which predispose patients to failure, including excessive posterior tibial slope (PTS), unaddressed high-grade pivot shift, and improper tunnel placement. The purpose of this review was to provide a current summary and analysis of the literature regarding patient-related and technical factors surrounding revision ACLR, rehabilitation considerations, overall outcomes and return to sport (RTS) for patients who undergo revision ACLR. There is a convincingly higher re-tear and revision rate in patients who undergo ACLR with allograft than autograft, especially amongst the young, athletic population. Unrecognized Posterior Cruciate Ligament (PLC) injury is a common cause of ACLR failure and current literature suggests concurrent operative management of high-grade PLC injuries. Given the high rates of revision surgery in young active patients who return to pivoting sports, the authors recommend strong consideration of a combined ACLR + Anterolateral Ligament (ALL) or Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) procedure in this population. Excessive PTS has been identified as an independent risk factor for ACL graft failure. Careful consideration of patient-specific factors such as age and activity level may influence the success of ACL reconstruction. Additional technical considerations including graft choice and fixation method, tunnel position, evaluation of concomitant posterolateral corner and high-grade pivot shift injuries, and the role of excessive posterior tibial slope may play a significant role in preventing failure.
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.