ArticleZhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery2026
[Chinese expert consensus on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the over-the-top technique (2025 edition)].
Article in Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Initiated by the Knee Group of the Chinese Society of Sports Medicine and the Arthroscopy Group of the Chinese Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons, domestic experts in the field were organized to develop a Chinese expert consensus on anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction using the over-the-top (OTT) technique, based on the latest clinical practices and research advancements. This consensus aims to standardize and promote the application of this technique in ACL reconstruction. Methods: The consensus was reached using the modified Delphi method and was completed through two rounds of online questionnaire surveys and one round of face-to-face expert meeting discussions. The consensus was jointly formulated by 43 sports medicine experts from grade Ⅲ class A hospitals across 20 provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities of China. Among them, 7 experts served as guiding experts. The consensus drafting team drafted the first draft of the consensus based on evidence-based evidence and transformed it into questionnaire items. The second draft was revised according to the feedback from the first round of questionnaires and discussed, revised and voted on item by item in face-to-face meetings. Items with an approval rate of ≥85% were recognized as having reached a consensus. The consensus terms were categorized as "strong" (approval rate: 95.0%-100%), "moderate" (approval rate: 90.0%-94.9%), and "basic" (approval rate: 85.0%-89.9%). Results: All 43 experts completed the entire process and participated in the face-to-face meeting. Ultimately, 9 consensus statements were agreed upon, including 8 highly-consensus items and 1 general consensus item, covering surgical indications, technical key points, and postoperative rehabilitation. Conclusion: The ACL OTT reconstruction technique does not require the establishment of a femoral tunnel and demonstrates favorable outcomes in adolescent ACL reconstruction and adult ACL revision, making it a viable surgical option for such patients. However, whether OTT reconstruction should be routinely recommended for primary ACL reconstruction in adults requires further clinical research to confirm its standardized application and ensure clinical efficacy.
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.