Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41869881›Full record

ArticleBone & joint research2026

Proximal hamstring reconstruction with a semitendinosus tendon allograft exhibits superior time-zero biomechanical properties compared to reconstruction with an Achilles tendon allograft.

Haruki Nishimura, Shintaro Mukohara, Kiminari Kataoka, Justin F M Hollenbeck, Amelia H Drumm, Natalie Cortes, Wyatt H Buchalter, Soshi Uchida, Marc J Philippon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bone & joint research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

9 authors.

Haruki NishimuraSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3031-7933
Shintaro MukoharaSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3615-2167
Kiminari KataokaSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1079-6386
Justin F M HollenbeckSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1682-0444
Amelia H DrummSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA.
Natalie CortesSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA.
Wyatt H BuchalterSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA.ORCID 0009-0002-3111-4417
Soshi UchidaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Wakamatsu Hospital of University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Kitakyushu, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-5975-8276
Marc J PhilipponSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, Colorado, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0358-3331

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: Chronic proximal hamstring tendon injuries sometimes require surgical reconstruction using a certain type of tendon graft. Although a distal hamstring and an Achilles tendon are the previously reported allograft options for this procedure, it remains unclear which allograft has superior biomechanical properties. The objective is to biomechanically compare the failure load, elongation at failure, and stiffness of proximal hamstring reconstruction techniques, using a semitendinosus tendon allograft and an Achilles tendon allograft. We hypothesized that the reconstruction, using a semitendinosus tendon allograft, would result in superior biomechanical properties. Methods: Eight pairs of fresh-frozen human cadaveric hemipelvises were obtained, along with Achilles tendon and semitendinosus allografts. Specimens first underwent non-destructive native-state testing to determine linear stiffness. Within each pair, specimens were randomly assigned to reconstruction with either an Achilles tendon or a semitendinosus allograft. Following repair, the specimens underwent uniaxial tension testing consisting of a preconditioning phase and pull-to-failure testing to determine failure load, elongation at failure, stiffness, and mode of failure. Results: The Achilles tendon allograft group failed at a significantly lower mean load than the semitendinosus group (213 N (SD 48) vs 366 N (SD 85); p = 0.005). Failure in the Achilles group occurred exclusively via suture pullout at the proximal end of the graft. Repairs with semitendinosus grafts most often failed by the same mechanism. Mean percent difference of native stiffness was significantly higher in the Achilles group compared to the semitendinosus group (34.4% (SD 14.1%) vs 13.1% (SD 6.4%); p = 0.003). Conclusion: Proximal hamstring reconstruction with a semitendinosus tendon allograft showed higher failure load and better preservation of native stiffness compared to an Achilles tendon allograft using the techniques described in this study. While construct differences may contribute to this result, these findings support semitendinosus as the strongest allograft option for proximal hamstring reconstruction.

Identifiers

PMID41869881
PMCPMC13007266

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.