ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Current Trends and Indications for Extra-Articular Reconstruction in Revision ACL Reconstruction: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The management of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) presents unique challenges that require careful consideration of graft selection and the role of anterolateral complex (ALC) augmentation. Although surgical techniques continue to evolve, there is variability in clinical practice patterns for revision ACLR. Purpose: To assess current trends in revision ACLR, including ALC augmentation indications, preferred augmentation techniques, and choice of graft type. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A survey was distributed by email to all members of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM). The survey included a demographics section (5 questions) and a revision ACLR section (12 questions). Descriptive statistics were performed. Results: There were 469 responses (response rate, 14%), with respondents more commonly being male (90%), fellowship-trained (95%), and in private practice (42%). The revision ACLR volume rose with the number of years in practice ( Conclusion: Revision ACLR practices vary widely, with no uniform consensus on graft choice and indications for ALC augmentation. ALC augmentation is most frequently indicated for patients with multiple previous failures. LET is the preferred augmentation technique, and the autograft patellar tendon is the most utilized graft in revision ACLR. Long-term outcomes of revision ACLR should be further studied to define ideal indications for augmentation and graft selection to address the relatively poor outcomes observed in patients undergoing revision ACLR.
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.