ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2024
Rate and Timing of Revision and Contralateral Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Relative to Index Surgery.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 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.
- An Analysis of Characteristics Associated With Bilateral Versus Unilateral Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries: A National Database Analysis.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- A Research Hotspot-Guided Meta-Analysis of Anterior Closing-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy in Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- National Demographic and Treatment Patterns of Finger Cellulitis, Paronychias, and Felons.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
- Intra-articular Hyaluronic Acid for Knee Osteoarthritis: Stabilizing Utilization Trends Amid Conflicting Clinical Practice Guidelines.JB & JS open accessArticle
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
Abstract
Background: After anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR), ipsilateral ACL graft reinjury or contralateral ACL injury has been reported. The rate and predictors of such subsequent ACL injuries have not been reported in recent years and in large patient cohorts. Purpose: The current study utilized a large, national, multi-insurance, administrative database to assess subsequent ACLR and factors associated with its occurrence. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Using the PearlDiver M151 database, patients who underwent ACLR within the United States between 2015 and 2021 were abstracted. All included patients had ≥3 years of evaluation after initial ACLR. Patients who underwent a subsequent reconstruction (ipsilateral or contralateral) within 3 years were determined and the timing assessed. Using univariable and multivariable logistic regression, the factors associated with having a subsequent ACLR and the factors associated with returning for ipsilateral versus contralateral ACLR were examined. Results: In total, 40,151 patients who underwent initial ACLR during the study period were identified. Of these, subsequent ACLR was performed for 1689 patients (4.2%). These included ipsilateral revision for 1018 (60.3%) and contralateral reconstruction for 671 (39.7%) patients. Patients returning for ipsilateral reconstruction did so sooner than patients needing a contralateral reconstruction. On multivariable analysis, the only factor independently associated with subsequent ACLR was younger age (odds ratio [OR] = 4.17 for 10-14 years relative to 25-29 years; Conclusion: The overall rate of requiring a subsequent ACLR was found to be 4.2%, with 60.3% of these being to the ipsilateral ACL. This information may be helpful for evolving injury-prevention programs and patient counseling.
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.