ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Concomitant Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Medial Collateral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.
Review 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. 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.
- What does a failure in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction really mean? An integrative view.Knee surgery & related research · 2026Review
- Pain as an Exploratory Marker of Rehabilitation Engagement After ACL Reconstruction: Combined Ligament Injuries and Digital Disengagement in a Sensor-Based Monitoring Cohort.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries are among the most commonly reported injury patterns in high-energy knee injuries. Concomitant ACL and MCL reconstruction (ACLR + MCLR) is indicated in patients with full-thickness tears and persistent valgus laxity. Purpose: To systematically review the literature to identify studies reporting on patients undergoing concurrent primary ACLR + MCLR to better understand current indications, surgical techniques, complications, and outcomes. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Under the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, 702 studies published in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library reporting on patients undergoing ACLR + MCLR from inception to April 2025 were initially identified. The inclusion criteria included studies reporting on human subjects undergoing ACLR + MCLR with injury mechanism, tear characteristics, surgical technique, graft types used for reconstruction, complications, and postoperative outcomes. Incidence rates for variables of interest were pooled as proportions with inverse variance weighting and displayed in forest plots, with heterogeneity of included studies assessed using the Results: Seventeen studies, including 902 patients undergoing concurrent ACLR + MCLR, with a mean follow-up of 30.6 months (range, 15-61 months), were identified. The weighted mean patient age was 32.9 years (range, 14-74 years), and 68.4% (n = 471/689) of patients were men. Sports-related traumatic knee injuries accounted for 51.3% (n = 309/602) of injuries, while motor vehicular accidents comprised 12.1% (n = 73/602). Reported indications for MCLR in the setting of ACL injury were chronic (≥6 weeks) valgus knee laxity despite nonoperative management (81.5%, n = 667/818) and grade 3 MCL injury (22.2%, n = 182/818). Autografts were utilized in 69.7% (n = 265/380) of ACLR and 61.1% (n = 140/262) of MCLR procedures, while anterior tibialis allografts (28.4%; n = 108/380) and hamstring tendon autografts (53.4%; n = 140/262) were the most frequently reported graft types in ACLR and MCLR, respectively. Complications were reported in 14 cases, including persistent medial knee pain (n = 7) and reconstruction failure (MCLR, n = 1; ACLR, n = 2). Mean Lysholm scores improved from 55.9 to 87.6, while mean Tegner and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores improved from 3.1 to 4.8 and 46.5 to 88.5, respectively. Conclusions: Our review revealed that concomitant ACLR + MCLR is most commonly performed for injuries sustained during pivoting sports, which result in persistent valgus laxity. Autografts were used in 70% of ACLR and 61% of MCLR procedures. Improvements in Lysholm, Tegner, and IKDC scores were noted in the majority of patients with a low incidence of complications (7.9%) and reconstruction failures (1.7%). These findings may enhance the understanding of proper surgical indications and methodology, thereby optimizing treatments and postoperative 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.