Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40429508›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2025

Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Rectus Femoris or Hamstring Tendon Shows Comparable Patient-Reported Outcome Measurements at Short-Term Follow-Up: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Thorsten Huber, Marcel Frühwirth, Florian Hartenbach, Sarah Franzmair, David Ullmann, Klemens Trieb, Björn Rath

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Thorsten HuberDepartment of Orthopedics, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, 4600 Wels, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-5294-4191
Marcel FrühwirthDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, 4600 Wels, Austria.
Florian HartenbachDepartment of Trauma Surgery, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, 4600 Wels, Austria.
Sarah FranzmairDepartment of Orthopedics, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, 4600 Wels, Austria.
David UllmannDepartment of Orthopedics, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, 4600 Wels, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-7596-8006
Klemens TriebDepartment of Orthopedics, Paracelsus Medical University, 5020 Salzburg, Austria.
Björn RathDepartment of Orthopedics, Klinikum Wels-Grieskirchen, 4600 Wels, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

HYPOTHESIS: This study compares patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) between revision ACL reconstruction with an RT autograft and a hamstring tendon (HT) autograft. We hypothesized that the RT autograft will yield comparable functional results and high patient satisfaction. STUDY

designThis was a cohort study; the level of evidence is III. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The incidence of revision ACL reconstruction is rising. Surgeons should be aware of all the available graft options. The isolated RT expands the range of autografts available for ACL reconstruction.

Indexed as

ACL autograftrectus femoris tendon graftrevision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Identifiers

PMID40429508
PMCPMC12112362

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.