ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2026
Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of All-inside Versus Complete Tibial Tunnel Techniques in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction using Hamstring Tendon Autograft: A Prospective Comparative Study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 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
Introduction: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction aims to restore knee stability and function while minimizing tunnel-related complications. The all-inside technique was developed to preserve bone stock, reduce post-operative pain, and improved function. This study, therefore, aimed to compare clinical and radiological outcomes between the all-inside and full tibial tunnel ACL reconstruction techniques. Materials and Methods: The study prospectively enrolled 60 patients and divided in two groups, 30 patients in each, an all-inside and full tibial tunnel group. At final follow-up, subjective functional scores were used to assess the functional outcome, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was used to assess socket/tunnel widening and graft characteristics. Subjective functional scores included the Lysholm knee score, the International Knee Documentation Committee score, and the knee society score for pain and function. MRI was used to measure the value of bone socket/tunnel widening, graft fiber integrity, graft laxity, and posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) buckling. Results: At the final follow-up of 18-24 months, no significant differences were found with respect to femoral socket widening and subjective function scores. However, a significant increase in tibial tunnel diameter was found in the full tibial tunnel group compared to the all-inside group (P < 0.005). Knee stability and MRI parameters, including graft continuity, graft laxity, and PCL buckling, were comparable between groups. Conclusion: Both surgical techniques result in satisfactory clinical and radiological outcomes following ACL reconstruction. However, the all-inside technique offers a radiological advantage by significantly reducing tibial tunnel enlargement, likely due to closed socket creation and suspensory fixation, making it a biomechanically favorable option without compromising functional results.
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.