SynthesisBMC surgery2025
Remnant-preserving techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disrupted sensorimotor control after ACL injury: from mechanoreceptor degeneration to neuroplasticity-oriented rehabilitation.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Remnant-preserving selective posterolateral bundle reconstruction for partial ACL tears: a retrospective comparative study of functional outcomes, graft maturation, and return-to-sport rates with and without biologic augmentation.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Chronic ACL Injury Drives a Fibrotic and Matrix-Degradative Shift: A Multi-Level Analysis of MMP-13 and TGF-β1.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Effect of tibial remnant preservation on clinical, radiological and surgical outcomes in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a retrospective single-center comparative study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a widely performed procedure to restore knee function and stability. Remnant-preserving techniques have been proposed to improve postoperative outcomes by retaining the proprioceptive and biological benefits of the ACL remnant. Remnant preservation is hypothesized to enhance graft integration and proprioceptive restoration. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the surgical and functional outcomes of remnant-preserving ACLR compared to standard ACLR.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was conducted on November 6, 2024, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compared remnant-preserving ACLR with standard ACLR. Outcomes assessed included functional scores (Lysholm and IKDC), knee stability (KT-1000/2000 measurements), and complication rates. Quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs. Statistical analyses utilized fixed- or random-effects models based on heterogeneity.
resultsThe meta-analysis included 10 studies, comprising 6 RCTs and 4 cohort studies. Remnant-preserving ACLR demonstrated significant improvements in Lysholm scores (WMD = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.29-1.42; P < 0.05) and knee stability (RCTs: WMD = -0.45; 95% CI, -0.62 to -0.27; P < 0.01; cohort studies: WMD = -0.42; 95% CI, -0.62 to -0.23; P < 0.01). No significant difference was observed in IKDC scores (WMD = -0.21; 95% CI, -1.68 to 1.26; P > 0.05) or complication rates (RR = 1.16; 95% CI, 0.77-1.76; P > 0.05). Publication bias was not detected.
conclusionsRemnant-preserving ACLR provides superior functional outcomes and knee stability compared to standard ACLR without increasing complication rates. These findings support the adoption of remnant-preserving techniques in clinical practice. Further research is needed to assess long-term outcomes and refine patient selection criteria.
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.