ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Comparative Outcomes After Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Allograft Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Using Various Allograft Processing Protocols.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Graft choice in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is determined by surgeon preference, patient factors, and graft characteristics. An allograft is a viable option with benefits such as decreased operative times and no donor site morbidities, and it can be the preferred graft choice in certain patient populations. Despite this, there is no established standard for allograft processing. Purpose: To determine whether allograft processing techniques influence the risk of graft failure, patient-reported outcomes, and revision surgery in patients undergoing ACLR. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Consecutive patients from 3 fellowship-trained sports medicine surgeons undergoing ACLR with patellar tendon allografts from January 1, 2016, to January 1, 2022, were identified. Descriptive data, mechanism of injury, graft processing technique, revision history, and patient-reported outcome scores were collected. The primary endpoint was aseptic failure as defined by graft rupture on magnetic resonance imaging. Statistical analysis was performed with the χ Results: A total of 189 patients who underwent ACLR and met the inclusion/exclusion criteria were identified, with 103 Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation (MTF), 55 Allowash XG, and 31 BioCleanse allografts. The mean age of patients was 43.4 ± 10.5 years, and 60.9% were women. No significant difference was observed between the groups with regard to sex and body mass index ( Conclusion: Bone-patellar tendon-bone allografts processed using BioCleanse, Allowash XG, and the MTF protocol had similar rates of graft failure and postoperative IKDC scores. Although underpowered, the data suggest that each of these techniques can be used safely with low failure rates and good functional 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.