ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2026
No Postoperative Difference Between Bone-Block Versus All-Soft Tissue Quadriceps Tendon Autografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
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.
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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Quadriceps tendon autografts are increasingly used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), harvested either with a patellar bone block (quadriceps tendon bone block [QTBB]) or as an all-soft tissue graft (quadriceps tendon soft tissue [QTST]). However, comparative data on outcomes remain limited and heterogeneous. Hypothesis: It was hypothesized that there would be no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes, objective stability, return to sports, or complication rates between QTBB and QTST grafts used for primary ACLR. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of 4 databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and SportDISCUS) was conducted through November 2024. Studies reporting outcomes after primary ACLR using QTBB or QTST autografts were included (Levels 1-4 evidence). Random-effects meta-analyses pooled outcomes for each graft; meta-regression compared grafts while adjusting for follow-up duration and publication year. Risk of bias was assessed using Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I), and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Results: A total of 44 studies (n = 2083; QTBB = 1104; QTST = 979) met the inclusion criteria with a mean follow-up of 29 months. International Knee Documentation Committee scores averaged 79.7 (95% CI, 74.8-84.6) for QTBB and 85.4 (95% CI, 80.9-89.8) for QTST autografts (β = 5.2; Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis found no clinically meaningful differences in short-term patient-reported outcomes, graft integrity, RTS rates, or complications between QTBB and QTST grafts in primary 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.