ReviewJournal of orthopaedics2024
All-inside posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction - A systematic review of current practice.
Review in Journal of orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accurate Measurement in All-inside Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Technical Note.Arthroscopy techniques · 2026Article
- Quadrupled Soft-Tissue Graft Preparation With Adjustable Loop Devices for All-Inside Anterior and Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions-Small Steps for an Optimal Outcome.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Biomechanical comparison of three tibial tunnel positions for PCL reconstruction: a 3D finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Research progress and clinical application of all-inside reconstruction techniques: narrative review.Frontiers in surgery · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The All-Inside PCL Reconstruction is a surgical technique which overcomes some of the key challenges faced with traditional PCL Reconstruction, and is becoming more relevant as the rate of PCL reconstruction increases.The purpose of this study is to review the technical practices of the all-inside PCL reconstruction since it was first introduced, with respect to the various key components involved in the surgical technique, to provide more information to the surgeon of the various surgical options available in practice. Materials and methods: A systematic review was performed by the authors in January 2023 as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines to identify all studies outlining the all-inside surgical technique in the past decade. The predetermined eligibility criteria were applied in the screening of the literature in Pubmed, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases. Results: A total of 14 studies were included in the final review, 9 technical studies, 2 case series, 2 book chapters and 1 review. An allograft was the preferred choice in 9 of the 14 studies. The semitendinosus was preferred when an autograft was chosen. Quadruple folding of the graft was the preferred configuration in 11 studies with the graft diameters from 8 to 12 mm and length ranging from 60 to 150 mm. The femur socket length ranged from 15 to 35 mm and the tibia socket length ranged from 20 to 70 mm. All the studies reported the use of at least 3 portals and up to 6 portals was also reported. 13 studies reported the graft docking first into tibia socket followed by the femoral socket. 7 studies reported the graft entry via the AM portal and 6 studies used a lateral portal. 9 studies used augmentation such as suture anchors (6 studies) and suture tape (3 studies). The 30° and 70° arthroscopic lenses were used alternatingly in 8 studies and fluoroscopy was utilized in 10 studies. Conclusion: The current literature review of all-inside PCL reconstruction consisted mainly technical studies and more clinical outcomes studies are needed to determine its efficacy. It observed a trend to use an allograft, at least 3 portals and docking the graft in the tibia socket first. There is no obvious preference of portal for graft entry.
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.