ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2024
A Long-term Comparison of Outcome of Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Bioabsorbable Interference Screw and Endobutton on Femur.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is a very commonly done procedure in recent times. There is a need for a long-term outcome study of ACL reconstruction with a comparison between different types of fixation techniques. The graft fixation methods vary from aperture fixation (interference screws) to suspensory fixation methods (endobutton). Failure of graft incorporation and the development of tunnel widening (TW) after ACL reconstruction have been frequently reported in the long term in present literature. TW especially complicates revision ACL surgery. This is a prospective non-randomized clinical study of arthroscopic ACL reconstruction comparing the functional results between aperture fixation and suspensory fixation. Materials and Methods: Two groups of 14 patients who underwent autogenous hamstring ACL reconstruction with a minimum of 2-year follow-up evaluation were included in the study. The first group underwent aperture fixation with bioabsorbable interference screw at tibial and femoral side. The second group underwent suspensory fixation with endobutton fixation on the femoral side and biointerference screw on the tibial side. Both group patients were examined clinically before surgery, and at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and at 2 years. They were compared for functional outcome with Tegner Lysholm knee score. Observation and Results: There was a significant improvement in functional outcome in both the groups for base and at 3 months, also for 3 months and 6 months but for 6 months-1 year. Group 2 is almost significant. This improvement in outcome in Group 2 is consistent from 1 year to 2 years. Conclusion: In our prospective study comparing the outcomes of functional outcomes of ACL reconstruction with aperture fixation versus suspensory fixation on the femur, which was evaluated using Tegner Lysholm knee score over a period of 2 years, suspensory fixation was found to be better. However, further studies involving a larger series of cases are required for a better evaluation of the outcome.
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.