ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2026
Comparison of All-Inside Suture Implant Versus Suture Hook Technique for Meniscal Ramp Lesions: 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Ramp lesions, tears at the posteromedial meniscocapsular junction, often accompany anterior cruciate ligament injuries and compromise stability. The all-inside repair is gaining popularity for its minimally invasive approach, though comparative data with suture hook (SH) repair remain limited. Purpose: To compare clinical outcomes of all-inside suture implant (SI) versus SH repair technique for ramp lesions. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)-guided search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar identified studies comparing all-inside SI versus SH repair for ramp lesions. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted data, and assessed quality with the Risk Of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies-of Interventions. Pooled mean differences and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated, with heterogeneity evaluated by Q-test and Results: Five studies (2 case-control and 3 cohorts) with 901 patients were included; 388 underwent all-inside SI repair. The mean age was 28.71 years, with follow-up ranging from 12 to 24 months. There was a significant difference in overall repair failure between groups, with 99 failures out of 388 cases (25.5%) in the all-inside SI group compared with 55 failures out of 513 cases (10.7%) in the SH group (OR, 2.36; Conclusion: SI repair for ramp lesions shows higher failure and secondary meniscectomy rates than SH repair. Functional outcomes appear largely comparable between the 2 repair techniques. Results should be interpreted cautiously, as outcomes depend on surgical technique, visualization, suture configuration, and rehabilitation. More high-quality studies are needed to define the optimal repair method.
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.