ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
Single-stage autograft revision for failed ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Improved clinical outcomes at a minimum 5-year follow-up.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiligament-injured knee: what the general orthopedic surgeon should know.EFORT open reviews · 2026Review
- Single-stage autograft revision for failed ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Improved clinical outcomes at a minimum 5-year follow-up.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate mid-term clinical outcomes and intraoperative findings in patients undergoing single-stage revision after failed ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS) anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Methods: This retrospective study evaluated patients who underwent ACL revision surgery following initial reconstruction using the LARS device. Clinical assessments included the Tegner activity scale, Lysholm Knee score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, recorded preoperatively and at a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Preoperative imaging was conducted to assess tunnel widening, alignment, and the presence of arthritic changes. Intraoperative evaluations included arthroscopic inspection of the synovium, menisci, and cartilage. Synovial biopsies were obtained for histological analysis of inflammation. Results: Twenty-five patients were included in the study. Clinical scores demonstrated significant improvement in Tegner activity scale ( Conclusions: Single-stage revision ACLR using autografts led to significant clinical improvement after LARS ACLR failure, with a mean follow-up of 7.8 years. All cases during revision demonstrated synovial inflammation, with a high prevalence of chondral lesions and early arthritis. While these findings may point to a potential association between synthetic grafts and degenerative joint pathology, causality cannot be established, as degenerative changes are known to occur following failed ACL reconstructions regardless of graft type. Level of Evidence: Level IV.
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.