Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39211701›Full record

ArticleCureus2024

Functional and Symptomatic Improvements Based on the Femoral Tunnel Drilling Technique in Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Reconstruction.

Sarah C Kurkowski, Michael J Thimmesch, Sophia Le, Henry Kuechly, Lynessa McGee, Michael Kloby, Paul McMillan, Logan P Lake, Barton Branam, Christopher Utz and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Sarah C KurkowskiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.
Michael J ThimmeschMedical School, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA.
Sophia LeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.
Henry KuechlyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.
Lynessa McGeeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.
Michael KlobyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.
Paul McMillanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.
Logan P LakeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.
Barton BranamDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.
Christopher UtzDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.
Brian GraweDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe current literature comparing femoral tunnel techniques often reports on short-term outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), but only a few studies have analyzed long-term outcomes. In addition, many studies have compared transtibial to anteromedial portal techniques without differentiating whether rigid or flexible reaming is used, making it difficult to infer how the techniques truly compare to one another. PURPOSE: This study aimed to detect differences in patient-reported outcome scores in those treated with three different femoral tunnel drilling techniques. STUDY

designThis study is a prospective cohort study.

methodsOf 650 patients treated for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries with ACLR, 350 were 5+ years out from surgery. Of these patients, 111 completed patient-reported outcome surveys (PROs). The Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to detect differences between patients treated with either of the three femoral tunnel drilling techniques: transtibial (TT), anteromedial portal with rigid reaming (AMP-RR), or anteromedial portal with flexible reaming (AMP-FR). Bonferroni correction was applied to the p-values to reduce the risk of making a type 1 error.

resultsNo differences were found between the three groups in demographics or postoperative PROs. However, there was a significant change between pre-surgery and post-surgery PROs. TT, when compared to AMP-RR, had a greater increase in satisfaction and greater improvement in a patient's ability to go up and down the stairs from pre-surgery to post-surgery. AMP-FR, when compared to TT, had greater improvement of the patient's knee stiffness/swelling. AMP-FR, when compared to AMP-RR, had greater improvement in knee pain during stairs and the ability to go down the stairs. No differences in return to sport, additional procedures on the affected knee (meniscal surgeries or cyclops lesion excisions), or revision surgery rates were found.

conclusionOverall, postoperative PROs did not show statistically significant differences between the three femoral tunnel drilling techniques. Differences, however, were identified in the responses to specific questions on PRO surveys, which may have otherwise been overlooked. It is important to recognize the differences between TT, AMP-RR, and AMP-FR in the improvement of stair climbing and swelling/stiffness as these likely directly affect a patient's satisfaction from pre-ACLR to post-ACLR.

Indexed as

aclanteromedial portalfemoral tunnel drillingflexible reamingknee ligamentsrigid reamingtranstibial

Identifiers

PMID39211701
PMCPMC11360672

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.