ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2026
Effectiveness of synthetic vs. autologous ligaments in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with remnant preservation: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 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
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy of the Ligament Advanced Reinforcement System (LARS) artificial ligament vs. autologous hamstring tendons in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with remnant preservation, with particular focus on proprioceptive recovery, joint stability, functional outcomes, return-to-sport timelines, and complication profiles during early to mid-term follow-up. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 162 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with remnant preservation between January 2020 and June 2023. Participants were stratified into two treatment groups: the LARS cohort ( Results: The autograft group exhibited significantly superior proprioceptive recovery, as evidenced by lower TDPM values at both 6 and 12-month intervals ( Conclusion: Our findings suggest distinct temporal advantage patterns between the two graft types. The LARS artificial ligament may provide superior early stabilization and a quicker return to athletic activities in the short term, while autologous hamstring tendons appear to offer more favorable long-term functional outcomes, proprioceptive recovery, and sustained sports participation. These observations support the hypothesis that clinical decision-making should incorporate individual patient factors. Additionally, the remnant tensioning technique may offer potential benefits in reducing complications, though this requires further investigation to confirm causality.
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.