Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41783085›Full record

ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2026

Outcomes of Isolated Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis for Residual Laxity Following ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.

Omar Haque, Andjela Dragovic, Mark Polemidiotis, Marc Daniel Bouchard, Prushoth Vivekanantha, David Slawaska-Eng, Jeffrey Kay, George F Rick Hatch

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Omar HaqueMichael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4423-396X
Andjela DragovicDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Mark PolemidiotisSchool of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Marc Daniel BouchardDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-6883-9486
Prushoth VivekananthaDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
David Slawaska-EngDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Jeffrey KayDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
George F Rick HatchDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Despite surgical reconstruction, some patients develop persistent residual rotatory laxity following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR). Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) has been shown to be a successful adjunctive procedure to address anterolateral instability in high-risk patients with ACL tears. It is often performed during ACLR; however, there is growing interest in understanding possible indications for the LET as an isolated procedure. Purpose: To consolidate the current evidence on isolated LET (iLET) following ACLR, explore its indications, and evaluate outcomes such as laxity, patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures (PROMs), and complication rates. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was performed across Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, EBM Reviews, and Emcare from inception to April 2025. Studies were eligible if they reported outcomes in patients undergoing iLET for residual laxity following ACLR with evidence of an intact ACL graft. Biomechanical, cadaveric, and non-English studies were excluded. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed methodological quality. A narrative synthesis was conducted, with descriptive statistics (frequencies, percentages, or weighted means with measures of variability) reported where appropriate. Results: Four studies (N = 69 patients, 70 knees) were included, with a mean ± SD patient age of 25.3 ± 2.9) and follow-up period of 26.3 ± 3.6 months. Patients demonstrated significant reductions in rotatory laxity following iLET, with only 6 patients reporting positive postoperative pivot shift (grade ≥1). Reported PROMs improved across all studies. Complication rates ranged from 15.8% to 36.8% while failure rates ranged from 0% to 10.5%. Conclusion: This review demonstrated that iLET may provide favorable PROs, reduction in laxity, and low failure rates in patients with residual laxity following ACLR. These findings suggest that the use of iLET may be a viable option for residual laxity following ACLR with evidence of an intact ACL graft; however, a limited number of reporting studies and small sample size require these results to be interpreted with caution.

Indexed as

anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR)knee instabilitylateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET)pivot shiftresidual laxity

Identifiers

PMID41783085
PMCPMC12953949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.