ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
Biomechanical comparison of all-inside meniscal suture configurations for posterior root tear: Three conventional stitches versus delta-grip stitch.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Biomechanical comparison of all-inside meniscal suture configurations for posterior root tear: Three conventional stitches versus delta-grip stitch.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to compare the biomechanical properties of four meniscal suture configurations-two simple sutures (TSS), two cinch sutures, a locking loop stitch (LLS), and a delta-grip stitch (DGS)-for transtibial pullout repair of medial meniscus posterior root tears (MMPRTs) using porcine menisci. Methods: Forty porcine menisci were randomly assigned to each suture configuration with all-inside repair. All specimens were subjected to cyclic loading for 1000 cycles, followed by a load-to-failure test. We evaluated displacement after cyclic loading, the ultimate failure load and the mode of failure. Results: No significant differences in displacement were observed between the configurations ( Conclusion: The results suggest that the DGS provides superior fixation strength and enhances MMPRT repair outcomes. Level of Evidence: Level IV.
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.