ReviewJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2025
Allograft vs. autograft for chronic acromioclavicular joint instability: a systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes and complications.
Review in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chronic Acromioclavicular Joint Instability: Outcomes after Stabilization without Tendon Graft Augmentation.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
- Chronic acromioclavicular dislocations repaired by modified Weaver-Dunn technique with two EndoButtons: retrospective review of twenty three cases.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Acromioclavicular joint stabilization using autologous biceps for horizontal neutralization technique in the revision setting of acromioclavicular joint stabilization using autologous biceps.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Article
- Chronic Acromioclavicular Joint Reconstruction With Semitendinosus Allograft: The X's Technique.Video journal of sports medicineArticle
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: Chronic acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) instability is commonly treated with surgical reconstruction of the coracoclavicular ligament using tendon grafts. Both autografts and allografts are widely utilized, with no clear consensus on the superior option. Autografts, such as hamstring tendons, provide favorable outcomes but are associated with donor-site morbidity, whereas allografts offer an alternative without harvesting morbidity but may introduce complications such as osteolysis and immune-mediated tissue rejection. The choice between these grafts remains a topic of debate. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes, complication rates, and donor-site morbidity of autograft vs. allograft tendon augmentation in chronic ACJ instability. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, SportDiscus, and Web of Science until July 3, 2024. Studies were screened independently by two reviewers, with inclusion limited to English, Dutch, French, and German publications. Studies involving adults (≥18 years) with chronic ACJ dislocation (Rockwood type ≥ III) undergoing autograft or allograft reconstruction were included. Exclusion criteria encompassed biomechanical, cadaveric studies, and studies lacking separate outcome reporting for graft types. Data extraction was performed using standardized templates and analyzed with RStudio. Functional, radiological, and complication outcomes were pooled using random-effects models. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Results: A total of 42 studies (827 patients) met the inclusion criteria, with 26 included in the meta-analysis. No significant differences were observed in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Constant-Murley Score, Visual Analog Scale, or Disabilities of the Arm, Hand and Shoulder scores between autografts and allografts ( Conclusion: Both autograft and allograft tendon augmentation provide comparable functional outcomes for chronic ACJ instability. During graft selection, one should consider patient-specific factors, weighing donor-site morbidity against potential allograft-related complications. Further standardized, high-quality research is required to guide optimal treatment selection.
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.