ReviewActa ortopedica brasileira2026
USE OF PERONEUS LONGUS AS A GRAFT FOR ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION: A META-ANALYSIS.
Review in Acta ortopedica brasileira, 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
To evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using the long fibular graft, compared to the hamstrings. This is a systematic review with meta-analysis, analyzing articles published in English and Portuguese between 1980 and 2025, in the databases MEDLINE, PUBMED, COCHRANE, and SCIELO. The variables of interest were: IKDC, Lysholm, AOFAS, sample size, and participants' age. Cochrane's Q test and I2 statistics were used to assess heterogeneity. Significant heterogeneity was identified when p-values were below 0.10, and I2 values were above 25%. Twelve articles were included in the scope of this review. The studies involved 1,212 patients, of whom 72.23% were male, and 18.49% were female. The follow-up time of the patients ranged from six months to five years. No statistically significant differences were found in IKDC and Lysholm of the two samples. There was a small statistical difference in the AOFAS scale. We did not find studies in the literature with sufficient relevance to demonstrate the superiority of long fibular reconstruction as a graft. There are also not enough studies to determine morbidity at the donor site. The use of the long fibular as a graft is promising, but requires caution.
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.