ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2026
Extra-articular Tenodesis for ACL Reconstruction: Who Needs it and is there a Superior Technique?
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Magnetic resonance imaging-based identification of the knee anterolateral ligament: A systematic review with meta-analysis.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Review
- Comparing Outcomes of ACL Reconstruction with and Without Cyclic Graft Loading: A Two-Year Minimum Follow-Up Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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 of reviewTo provide a comprehensive overview of the indications for lateral extra-articular tenodesis in addition to anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), followed by a discussion on the existing techniques with their perceived advantages and disadvantages. RECENT
findingsRecent evidence has shifted lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) from a routine “add-on” to a selective adjunct for patients at higher risk of residual rotatory instability and ACL graft failure after isolated ACLR. Level I clinical evidence suggests that adding an iliotibial (ITB) – based LET can meaningfully reduce graft rupture rates while improving control of pivot shift – type instability. The 2025 International Consensus on lateral extra-articular procedures (LEAPs) supports LET/anterolateral augmentation particularly for revision ACLR, high-grade pivot shift, generalized laxity or hyperextension/recurvatum, and young athletes returning to pivoting/contact sports. The consensus also mentions that modern LEAPs have low complication rates, do not typically require altered rehabilitation, and have not shown a consistent signal for increased lateral compartment osteoarthritis when contemporary technique principles are followed. Finally, despite the variety of described constructs (modified Lemaire variants, other ITB-based tenodeses, and anatomic ALL reconstruction), current literature does not demonstrate a single universally superior technique. Instead, success appears to be linked to correct patient selection, adherence to key technical principles (appropriate graft routing & low-tension fixation), and age or skeletal – maturity – appropriate modifications. When applied selectively in high-risk patients, adding a lateral extra-articular tenodesis to ACL reconstruction can improve rotational control and reduce re-injury, but current evidence does not support a single universally superior LET construct. Optimal results depend on appropriate indications, careful technique, and tailoring the approach to patient factors such as age, sport demands, laxity profile, and skeletal maturity.
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.