ReviewIndian journal of orthopaedics2026
Outcomes of Open Versus Arthroscopic Anterior Talofibular Ligament Repair: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Review in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The most effective treatment for chronic lateral ankle instability is still open lateral ankle ligament repair. However, because arthroscopic repair is less intrusive and more surgeons are choosing it, it has become more and more common. For persistent lateral ankle instability, the purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) was to compare the clinical results of arthroscopic and open repair. Method: This SRMA was conducted per PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was performed across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library using predefined keywords. Both prospective and retrospective studies comparing arthroscopic and open lateral ligament repair were included. Results: Open repair demonstrated significantly superior functional outcomes as reflected by higher AOFAS scores (MD 0.68, 95% CI 0.10-1.25; p = 0.02), Karlsson scores (MD 1.08, 95% CI 0.38-1.78; p = 0.003), and JSSF scores, along with a significantly lower incidence of knot-related pain (OR 3.81, 95% CI 1.25-11.60; p = 0.02). Although Tegner activity scores showed no significant difference (MD - 0.05, 95% CI - 0.73 to 0.62; p = 0.88), arthroscopic repair was associated with lower postoperative pain levels (VAS score: MD - 0.47, 95% CI - 0.77 to - 0.17; p = 0.002) and fewer wound-related complications (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20-0.91; p = 0.03). No significant differences were observed in overall complication rates (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.58-1.20; p = 0.33), infection, nerve injury, radiological outcomes (anterior talar displacement and talar tilt), or operative duration. Conclusion: Current evidence indicates that open Brostrom-Gould repair yields better functional outcomes and reduces knot-related discomfort. Conversely, arthroscopic repair offers the benefits of reduced wound-related complications and superior postoperative pain control. With comparable rates of complications and operative time, arthroscopic techniques remain a viable and less invasive alternative, particularly in experienced hands. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-025-01473-8.
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.