ArticleMalaysian orthopaedic journal2025
Morphometric Analysis of the Tibial Tunnel after Primary and Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.
Article in Malaysian orthopaedic journal, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is a commonly performed surgical procedure. The objectives of this retrospective comparative study are (1) to evaluate the obliquity, size and the intra-articular aperture shape of the tibial tunnel in patients operated with an anteromedial portal technique, and (2) to determine their possible relation with revision surgery. Material and Methods: Patients operated for a primary ACL reconstruction between 2014 and 2018 were eligible. All patients of primary and revision ACL fulfilling the inclusion criteria were assessed for presence of a knee CT scan within one month of surgery and at least three years of follow-up. Several radiological parameters were measured for the study, among which: Tunnel height, Coronal tunnel angle, Maximal tunnel width and Sagittal tunnel inclination. Multivariate analyses were performed to identify parameters correlated with revision. Results: Mean age of the primary group was 30.5±8.4 versus 29.4±8.0 of the revision group. The majority of patients were males in both groups (n=33, 76.7% and n=38, 95.0%, respectively). A longer diameter of the intra-articular ellipse (p=0.005) and an increased mid-tunnel to TT distance on the axial plane (p=0.006) were significantly correlated with revision. A ROC curve analysis determined a cut-off value of 27.9mm from the tubercle was an optimal entry point. Conclusion: A greater distance between the mid-point of the tibial tunnel entrance and the centre of the tibial tubercle is linked to a higher risk of revision. An elongated elliptic shape in the antero-posterior plane also correlates with revision risk.
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.