ReviewCureus2024
Acromioclavicular Joint Reconstruction Using the Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System Technique: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Low short-term complication rates following acromioclavicular joint surgery: a large database study.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Article
- Autologous Long Head of Biceps Tendon With High-Strength Suture for Reconstruction of Coracoclavicular Ligament.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
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
The acromioclavicular (AC) joint is crucial for shoulder function. Injuries, often in young males, result from trauma or degeneration. Treatment ranges from conservative to surgical. The Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System (LARS) technique was noted for restoring stability and function. In this review, we evaluate the LARS technique for AC joint reconstruction, focusing on clinical outcomes and complications. A literature search was done in May 2024 across PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library using keywords such as "acromioclavicular joint," "reconstruction," and "LARS." Inclusion criteria covered studies on the LARS technique. Data extraction included study design, patient demographics, surgical details, follow-up, and outcomes. The study quality was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions. Data were synthesized via meta-analyses. Also, publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots and Egger's test. From 200 records, three studies with 114 patients met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed significant improvements in functional recovery and pain reduction post-LARS surgery. Constant-Murley scores improved from a mean of 62.3 to 94.5. Visual analog scale pain levels decreased from 5.1 to 0.7. Despite high heterogeneity (I²=96%), the overall effect size strongly favored the LARS technique (standardized mean difference=-4.12 (95% CI: -4.63 to -3.60)). Complications were generally low, with calcification occurring in four patients, degenerative changes in two, and minor graft failures in another two. Patient satisfaction was high because they reported significant improvements in function and pain. Egger's test indicated no strong evidence of publication bias (p=0.083). The LARS technique enhances functional recovery and reduces pain. However, further research with larger, standardized studies and longer follow-ups is needed.
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.