Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38646275›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Conservative vs Surgical Treatment of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture: A Systematic Review.

Andreas Papaleontiou, Andréa M Poupard, Uday D Mahajan, Panteleimon Tsantanis

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Andreas PapaleontiouTrauma and Orthopaedics, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, GBR.
Andréa M PoupardTrauma and Orthopaedics, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, GBR.
Uday D MahajanTrauma and Orthopaedics, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, GBR.
Panteleimon TsantanisTrauma and Orthopaedics, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, GBR.
Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham · GBUniversity of Birmingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is very common, especially in young athletic individuals who injure themselves during sports involving pivoting actions. Management options include conservative management, which involves progressive physical therapy, educating the patient on how to prevent instability, and the use of a hinged knee brace. Surgical management involves reconstruction of the torn ligament using an autograft or an allograft and ACL repair where the torn ligament is affixed back to the tibia or femur. The choice of management depends on the severity of the injury, other injuries in associated structures, the level of fitness, and the athletic goals of the patient. Many studies exist on the management choice of ACL injury, but no clear consensus prevails. This study will examine the effectiveness of conservative versus surgical management. A literature review will be performed to identify appropriate papers which compare and evaluate the two approaches. A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing the conservative to surgical management of ACL injury was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Patient eligibility criteria included individuals older than 15 with an isolated, recent ACL injury diagnosis via an appropriate clinical test, MRI, or arthroscopy. Studies were eligible if they were using appropriate surgical or conservative methods, as mentioned previously, and measuring results via appropriate scores, tools, and methods that will be presented below. The follow-up timeline would be from presentation time until at least two years. Five papers were found to be eligible. Overall, these papers included 462 patients. Two studies measuring overall knee symptoms, function, and sports activities using the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC) score found that the operated group had a significantly higher score. The other two studies measured overall knee function and health using the Tegner & Lysholm and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) scores. In both papers, no significant difference was found between the two groups. Regarding Tegner's activity score, only one paper had significant findings. A significantly longer period to return to sports activities was observed in the operative group. Stability was significantly higher in all papers in the operated group. Osteoarthritis was measured using different tools in each paper. Only one paper found a significantly higher risk in the operated group. Only one paper indicated significantly more complications in the operated group regarding side effects. Overall, very few differences were observed between the two treatment groups. The most significant differences observed were the higher stability and the longer recovery period in patients undergoing surgery. Large RCTs following patients for enough time are needed to prove if surgical treatment offers significant benefits over conservative treatment.

Indexed as

acl rehabilitationacl repairanterior cruciate ligament (acl)anterior cruciate ligament injuryconservative vs surgical managementsystematic literature review

Identifiers

PMID38646275
PMCPMC11027445
OpenAlexW4393004085

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.