ArticleThe American journal of sports medicine2025
Effect of Focal Cartilage Lesions on Patient-Reported Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A 10-Year Nationwide Cohort Study of 7040 Patients.
Article in The American 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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgical treatment of isolated cartilage lesions during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction was associated with greater lesion stability but similar 2-year clinical outcomes: A registry-based matched-pair second-look study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- ACL reconstruction in football players: A nationwide Swedish registry study of anteromedial versus transtibial femoral tunnel techniques.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Longitudinal Progression of Traumatic Bone Marrow Lesions Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Associations With Knee Pain and Concomitant Injuries.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFocal cartilage lesions are commonly associated with anterior cruciate ligament injuries. The long-term effect of these lesions on patient-reported outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) remains unclear. PURPOSE: To determine the effect of cartilage lesions-partial thickness (International Cartilage Regeneration and Joint Preservation Society grades 1 and 2) and full thickness (grades 3 and 4)-on patient-reported outcomes 10 years after ACLR. STUDY
designCohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
methodsThe study included all patients with primary unilateral ACLR enrolled in the Norwegian Knee Ligament Registry and Swedish Knee Ligament Registry from 2005 through 2008 (n = 15,783). At a mean follow-up of 10.1 years (SD, 0.2), 7040 (45%) patients completed the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Multiple linear regression analyses were used to evaluate any associations between concomitant cartilage lesions and KOOS outcomes 10 years after ACLR.
resultsOf the 7040 patients available at 10-year follow-up, 1425 (20.3%) had partial-thickness cartilage lesions at the time of ACLR, and 495 (7.0%) had full-thickness cartilage lesions. Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that partial- and full-thickness cartilage lesions were associated with significantly inferior scores across all KOOS subscales as compared with patients without cartilage lesions. Patients with full-thickness lesions had less postoperative improvement after ACLR in all KOOS subscales as compared with patients with partial-thickness lesions.
conclusionPatients with concomitant partial- or full-thickness cartilage lesions reported significantly worse outcomes in all KOOS subscales 10 years after ACLR as compared with patients without cartilage lesions.
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.