ArticleKnee surgery & related research2026
Large-sized grafts versus standard-sized grafts combined with anterolateral ligament reconstruction in ACL-deficient knees: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in Knee surgery & related research, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are highly prevalent among athletes and continue to pose challenges owing to persistent instability and variable return-to-sport outcomes following reconstruction. Anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction and has been introduced to improve outcomes. Increasing graft diameter was described to enhance biomechanical properties. This study hypothesis was, that ACL reconstruction (ACL-R) combined with ALL reconstruction is superior to a large-sized graft ACL-R. PURPOSE: To compare outcomes of large-sized (six-strand) hamstring grafts with those of standard-sized (four-strand) grafts combined with anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction in ACL-deficient knees.
methodsA total of 82 patients (18-45 years) undergoing ACL reconstruction were randomized to either a large (six-strand) hamstring graft group (group A, n = 41) or a standard-sized (four-strand) graft plus ALL reconstruction group (group B, n = 41). Primary outcomes were knee stability (pivot-shift and Lachman tests) and functional scores [Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores]. Secondary measures included pain scores, return to sport, and complication rates, with follow-up at 24 months.
resultsThe mean diameter of the large-sized graft was 9.5 ± 2.5 mm, while the mean diameter of the standard-sized graft was 8.0 ± 2.0 mm. Both groups demonstrated significant gains in stability and function. Lysholm scores improved from 51 to 94 in group A and from 56 to 98 in group B with no significant difference between both groups (p = 0.418), while IKDC scores rose from 37 to 88 and from 37 to 91, respectively and it was significantly higher in group B (p = 0.036). Negative pivot-shift was observed in 87.8% of group A and 90.2% of group B with no significant intergroup difference (p = 0.841). Return-to-sport at 12 months was 93.5% and 96.1%, respectively with no significant difference (p = 1.00). Graft rupture occurred in 4.8% of group A and 2.4% of group B. Overall complications were low and statistically comparable (p = 1.00).
conclusionsBoth large hamstring grafts and standard grafts augmented with ALL reconstruction provided significant functional and stability improvements, with no major differences between techniques.
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.