ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2024
Biomechanical analysis of four different meniscus suturing techniques for posterior meniscal root pull-out repair: A human cadaveric study.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultrasonographic Knee Abnormalities and Their Association with Pain in Young Male Handball and Basketball Athletes: A Cross-Sectional Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Biomechanical analysis of four different meniscus suturing techniques for posterior meniscal root pull-out repair: A human cadaveric study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare the biomechanical properties of the slip-knot technique with three other transtibial pullout suture repair constructs for meniscal root tears. Method: Thirty-two fresh-frozen cadaveric menisci were randomly allocated to four meniscus-suture fixation constructs: Two simple-sutures (TSS), two slip-knot (TSK) sutures, two cinch-loop (TCL) sutures, and two modified Mason-Allen (TMMA) sutures. Cyclic loading from 5 to 20 N was conducted for 1000 cycles at 0.5 Hz, and then loaded to failure at 0.5 mm/s. Parametric data (displacement during cyclic loading, ultimate load, yield load, and displacement at failure) were analysed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), whereas nonparametric data (stiffness) were analysed using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Results: After 1000 cycles, the TCL construct significantly displaced the most (mean ± SD, 6.78 ± 1.32 mm; Conclusion: The slip-knot technique has proven to be a simple, yet robust and stable meniscal root fixation option; moreover, it exhibited superiority over the more complex modified Mason-Allen suture construct in resisting displacement at the ultimate failure load. Level of Evidence: Not applicable.
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.