ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Clinical Outcome of Bicruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Multiple-Ligament Knee Injuries: Comparison With Bicruciate Reconstruction and Collateral Ligament Surgery.
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. 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.
- Evaluating Surgical Strategies and Functional Outcomes in Multi-Ligamentous Knee Injuries: A Prospective Study in Indian Patients.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
- Double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction procedure leads to better restoration of posterior knee laxity in isolated and multiple ligament knee injuries than single-bundle procedure.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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Several procedures for combined rupture of both anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) in multiple-ligament knee injuries (MLKIs) have been reported. However, the clinical outcome of these treatments remains controversial. Hypothesis: Postoperative knee stability and clinical outcomes in patients who underwent simultaneous bicruciate reconstruction would be comparable with those that underwent bicruciate reconstruction with collateral ligament surgery. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted with 41 patients (41 knees) who sustained unilateral MLKI with combined ACL and PCL rupture. Fifteen cases required simultaneous ACL and PCL reconstruction, and the others had additional surgical treatment as follows: At the time of cruciate ligament reconstruction, 14 cases required posteromedial corner (PMC) reconstruction and 8 cases required posterolateral corner (PLC) reconstruction. Five cases were treated with an initial PMC or PLC before the cruciate ligament reconstruction. One of these underwent PMC reconstruction at the second stage for residual valgus laxity. Then, the authors divided the cases into 2 groups based on surgical procedure: in group 1, 15 patients underwent only bicruciate reconstruction. In group 2, 26 patients underwent bicruciate and PMC or PLC reconstruction/repair. The patients were examined at ≥2 years after surgery. Results: The side-to-side difference in the total anteroposterior translation, and the relative position on the anterior and posterior stress radiographs significantly improved postoperatively in both groups (group 1: Conclusion: There were no significant differences in the knee stability and clinical results after bicruciate reconstruction between those with and those without collateral ligament surgery. Reconstruction of bicruciate MLKIs with repair or reconstruction of associated collateral ligament injuries improves clinical outcomes.
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.