Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39385323›Full record

Trial reportChinese medical journal2025

Which technique provides more benefits in return to sports and clinical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Double-bundle or single-bundle? A randomized controlled study.

Xinjie Wang, Zijie Xu, Shitang Song, Zimu Mao, Ximeng Huang, Michael Luo, Xiao Zhou, Bingbing Xu, Jing Ye, Yifan Song and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Chinese medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05400460 (Outcomes Under Three Different Procedures for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction, a Prospective Randomized Cohort Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

NCT05400460 nacompletednot on this map

Outcomes Under Three Different Procedures for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction, a Prospective Randomized Cohort Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorYu JiakuoRan2016 to 2021Enrolled406ConditionsAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesArmsAnatomical single-bundle reconstruction（ASBR method）, Double-bundle reconstruction （DBR method）, Central axial single-bundle reconstruction（CASBR group）, rehabilitation training protocol, Educate patients on return to sports and the importance of quadriceps strength
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Xinjie WangSports Medicine Department, Beijing Key Laboratory of Sports Injuries, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Zijie XuInstitute of Sports Medicine, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China.
Shitang SongPeking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China.
Zimu MaoSports Medicine Department, Beijing Key Laboratory of Sports Injuries, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Ximeng HuangSports Medicine Department, Beijing Key Laboratory of Sports Injuries, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Michael LuoSports Medicine Department, Beijing Key Laboratory of Sports Injuries, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Xiao ZhouSports Medicine Department, Beijing Key Laboratory of Sports Injuries, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Bingbing XuSports Medicine Department, Beijing Key Laboratory of Sports Injuries, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
Jing YeOrthopaedic Sports Medicine Center, Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Tsinghua University, Beijing 102218, China.
Yifan SongOrthopaedic Sports Medicine Center, Beijing Tsinghua Changgung Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Tsinghua University, Beijing 102218, China.
Jiakuo YuSports Medicine Department, Beijing Key Laboratory of Sports Injuries, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe achievement of an optimal return to sport (RTS) has remained a key goal after sports-related injuries, with the ongoing debate on the effectiveness of different surgical approaches for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture. This study aims to assess clinical outcomes and RTS across various surgical methods, such as anatomical single-bundle reconstruction (ASBR), central-axial single-bundle reconstruction (CASBR), and double-bundle reconstruction (DBR).

methodsA randomized clinical trial was conducted, comprising 191 patients who underwent ACL rupture. These patients were divided into three groups based on the ACL reconstruction techniques they received (ASBR, CASBR, DBR). Over the 2-year follow-up period, the study assessed RTS through four single-hop tests, isokinetic extension tests, and limb asymmetry indices. Postoperative graft status was determined using the signal-to-noise quotient (SNQ), while knee function was evaluated using the International Knee Documentation Committee 2000 (IKDC-2000) score, Lysholm score, Tegner score, and degree of knee laxity. A binary logistic regression model was developed to forecast the factors influencing ideal RTS.

resultsDBR (67.63%) and CASBR (58.00%) exhibited higher RTS passing rates compared to ASBR (30.39%; χ2 = 19.57, P <0.05). Quadriceps strength symmetry in the lower limbs was identified as the key determinant of RTS ( χ2 = 17.08, P <0.05). The RTS rate was influenced by SNQs of the graft's tibial site (odds ratio: 0.544) and quadriceps strength of the reconstructed knee joint at 60°/s (odds ratio: 6.346). Notably, the DBR group showed enhanced knee stability, evidenced by superior results in the Lachman test ( χ2 = 13.49, P <0.01), objective IKDC-2000 ( χ2 = 27.02, P = 0.002), and anterior instability test ( χ2 = 9.46, P <0.01). Furthermore, DBR demonstrated superior clinical outcomes based on the Lysholm score (DBR: 89.57 ± 7.72, CASBR: 83.00 ± 12.71, ASBR: 83.21 ± 11.95; F = 10.452, P <0.01) and IKDC-2000 score (DBR: 90.95 ± 7.00, CASBR: 84.64 ± 12.68, ASBR: 83.63 ± 11.41; F = 11.78, P <0.01).

conclusionFor patients with ACL rupture, more ideal RTS rate and clinical outcomes were shown in the DBR group than in the ASBR and CASBR groups. Autograft status and quadriceps strength are postively related to RTS.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05400460).

Indexed as

Anterior Cruciate LigamentAnterior Cruciate Ligament InjuriesAnterior Cruciate Ligament ReconstructionReturn to SportAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultAnatomical single-bundle reconstructionAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionCentral axial single-bundle reconstructionDouble-bundle reconstructionReturn to sport

Identifiers

PMID39385323
PMCPMC12453342

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.