ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2026
Achilles Allograft in the Upper Extremity: A Systematic Review.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Achillies tendon allografts (ATAs) are used in a variety of upper-extremity reconstructive procedures. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the existing literature on the complications, reoperation rates and outcomes associated with the use of ATAs in upper-extremity reconstructions. Methods: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic review was conducted of studies published between January 1990 and August 2024. Eligible studies included adult patients who underwent shoulder, elbow and wrist tendon reconstruction using ATAs to provide insight into the overall performance of ATA reconstruction in the upper extremity. Studies which did not report complications and/or functional outcomes were excluded. Retrospective, prospective, and randomized controlled trials were included, whereas cadaveric, biomechanical, and nonhuman studies were excluded. Results: A total of 23 studies comprising 408 cases met inclusion criteria. The most common indications for ATA use were distal biceps reconstruction (26%), irreparable rotator cuff tears (24%) and failed distal ulna resection (20%). The overall complication rate was 19%, with graft-related failure (43%) and infection (20%) as the most frequent complications. Reoperation was required in 10% of cases; predominantly because of graft failure (42%) and deep infection (29%). Despite these complications, patient-reported outcomes were favorable, with a mean postoperative-visual analog scale score of two and a Mayo Elbow Performance Score of 88, indicating substantial pain relief and functional improvement. Conclusions: ATAs in upper-extremity reconstructive procedures appear to result in low levels of postoperative pain and improvements in function. However, overall complication and reoperations rates following ATA use were 19% and 10%, respectively. Clinical relevance: ATA is advantageous in the sense that it can be used for a variety of shoulder, elbow, and wrist procedures; however, surgeons need to carefully weigh the benefits of decreased donor-site morbidity against the relatively high rates of complications.
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.