ReviewAnnals of joint2026
Evaluation of the anterior cruciate ligament-injured high-level athlete: a narrative review.
Review in Annals of joint, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: Injuries of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) are common among high-level athletes. Treatment is not always successful and elite athletes often have difficulties returning to a preinjury level of performance. Treatment of athletes is very demanding due to the high loads and strong forces on the ACL during competitive sports. Multiple risk factors associated with ACL reconstruction failure have been identified over the past decades. To provide the best possible treatment, knowledge about the diagnostic tools at the physician's disposal and their interpretation are of utmost importance. The objective of this review is to provide a structured summary of the literature on the evaluation of ACL-injured high-level athletes. Methods: A manual PubMed review about evaluation of ACL injured high-level athletes has been conducted on January 30 Key Content and Findings: The Lachman test yields high sensitivity, and the pivot-shift test high specificity. Knee hyperextension and general joint laxity (GJL) are risk factors for ACL reconstruction failure. Radiographs are necessary to rule out fractures or dislocations and are needed for alignment analysis, especially of the posterior tibial slope (PTS). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is recommended to confirm diagnosis, rule out concomitant injuries and plan anatomic reconstruction. Instrumented laxity measurement tools aim to measure anterior or rotational laxity. A variety of arthrometers can be used to quantitatively measure anterior laxity. Preoperative and postoperative pivot-shift correlates with clinical outcome of ACL reconstruction. Many attempts have been made to establish simple and reliable quantification methods. It remains a challenging task especially due to the dynamic nature of the pivot-shift test. Randomised controlled trials with large cohorts and multi-centre studies might provide more information about the reliability, accuracy and validity of these tools in the future and help determine a gold standard. Conclusions: This narrative review provides a structured summary of the literature and evidence-based recommendations regarding the assessment of ACL injured high-level athletes.
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.