ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Revision ACL reconstruction guided by 3D printed preoperative templating: comparison of outcomes between bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft and Ligament Augmentation and Reconstruction System (LARS) ligament.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo select the grafts using three-dimensional printed (3DP) preoperative templating and compare the outcomes between the Ligament Augmentation and Reconstruction System (LARS) ligament and Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone (BPTB) autograft in revision ACL reconstruction.
methodsPatients underwent revision ACL reconstruction between January 2019 and December 2021 were selected. The direction of the new and primary bone tunnel, overlap ratio of the intra-articular femoral tunnel aperture between new tunnels of different diameters and primary tunnels and graft choice for revision ACL reconstruction were studied. The patient-reported outcome scores included Tegner activity level, Lysholm and IKDC score. The objective evaluation measures included the Lachman test, the pivot shift test, the anterior tibial translation (ATT) and the rate of return to sport.
resultsA total of 59 patients (26 cases with LARS artificial ligament and 33 cases with BPTB) were enrolled. There were no statistically significant differences in subjective evaluation indexes between the two groups. In addition, the postoperative ATT measurements, Lachman and pivot shift test in LARS group were better than the BPTB group (P < 0.05). The rate of return to sport of LARS and BPTP group were 76.9% vs. 48.5% (P < 0.05) at one year after surgery and 88.5% vs. 81.8% (P > 0.05) at one year after surgery.
conclusionsThe 3DP preoperative templating can accurately select graft of LARS ligament or BPTB autograft. Both of these ligaments can achieve great outcomes in revision ACL reconstruction. Under the reasonable selection of grafts and the management of combined injuries, the LARS ligament has more advantages of restoring knee stability and early return to sport in short term follow-up.
trial registrationChiCTR2500095925 (Registration Date: 1/15/2025).
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.