ArticleThe American journal of sports medicine2025
Patient-Reported Outcomes of Bicruciate Multiligament Versus Single Cruciate Multiligament Knee Injuries.
Article in The American journal of sports medicine, 2025. 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.
- Quadriceps and Hamstring Muscle Strength Recovery After a Multiligament Knee Injury: A Long-term Follow-up.The American journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Postoperative stiffness requiring fibroarthrolysis does not impair long-term outcomes after multiligament knee reconstruction.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
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
backgroundMultiligament knee injuries (MLKIs) are heterogeneous, and bicruciate knee ligament injuries are considered a serious form of this injury. The current literature tends not to distinguish between single and bicruciate MLKI when reporting outcomes. PURPOSE: To investigate patient-reported outcomes after surgical treatment of MLKI comparing single cruciate MLKI with bicruciate MLKI. The secondary aim was to investigate the influence of different factors on patient-reported outcomes after surgery. STUDY
designCohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
methodsThis study was designed as a cross-sectional cohort study. Patients who underwent surgical treatment for MLKI at a single level 1 trauma center between January 2013 and December 2020 were included in this study. Patient-reported outcomes included the Tegner score, Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey (KOOS), and a visual analog scale for pain.
resultsOf the 191 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, 124 (65%) agreed to participate and had a complete data set with a follow-up time at a mean 74 ± 27 months. Patients with single cruciate MLKI (type I) had significantly higher scores for IKDC (
conclusionMLKIs involving a single cruciate ligament had significantly higher patient-reported postoperative outcome measures compared with bicruciate MLKIs. Age and type of injury were important predictors for outcomes. Patients presenting with dislocated knees had lower patient-reported outcomes; however, there was no significant difference in outcomes between bicruciate MLKIs and patients presenting with dislocated knees.
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.