ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Clinical Outcomes After Ipsilateral Versus Contralateral Autograft Harvest for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Contralateral donor autografts in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) may act as an alternative to conventional ipsilateral donor grafts but are rarely used clinically because of the lack of evidence on patient outcomes and concerns around additional morbidity. Purpose: To investigate the effect of contralateral versus ipsilateral autograft use in ACLR on patient outcomes. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched from inception to October 2022 for comparative studies assessing the clinical or functional outcomes of ipsilateral versus contralateral autograft harvest in primary or revision ACLR. Given the heterogeneity of the included studies, data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Results: Included were 11 studies representing 1638 patients with a mean follow-up of 49 months. The mean time to return to sport was shorter in patients treated with a contralateral bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft in 2 of 3 studies that evaluated this outcome after primary ACLR and in the only study that evaluated this outcome after revision ACLR. Some studies found improved strength recovery in the contralateral ACL-reconstructed knee. Otherwise, there was no significant difference between contralateral and ipsilateral ACLRs on subjective or objective postoperative clinical outcome scores. Most studies reported minimal donor site morbidity. Clinical adverse events including postoperative graft rerupture and infection were low in both contralateral and ipsilateral ACLRs and were not significantly different. Conclusion: Contralateral ACL autograft harvest may lead to earlier return to sport when patients undergo BPTB ACLR. However, clinical outcomes, morbidity, risk of rerupture, and risk of donor knee injury were not significantly different in this review.
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.