ArticleKnee surgery & related research2026
Utilizing supplementary high-strength suture tying over a bone bridge enhances the effectiveness of interference screw as tibial fixation method in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTibial fixation is the biomechanical weak point in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, with numerous techniques proposed to address this challenge. This study evaluates the utility of a simple, cost-effective system: high-strength suture tying over a bone bridge (BB). Its effectiveness as standalone fixation and as a supplement to standard interference screw (IS) fixation is compared with IS alone and supplemented with other commercial systems.
methodsA biomechanical study was conducted using six fixation methods tested on 61 specimens with bovine extensor tendons in porcine tibial models. Groups included BB alone, IS alone, and four hybrid fixation methods: IS + BB, IS + a cortical screw post (CSP), IS + a PushLock
resultsStandalone BB fixation showed limited performance, with an ultimate load to failure of 357.81 ± 90.53 N and cyclic displacement of 14.88 ± 3.28 mm, insufficient for early rehabilitation. When combined with IS, BB significantly improved performance, achieving an ultimate load to failure of 500.55 ± 151.24 N, comparable to commercial systems, and reducing cyclic displacement to 4.82 ± 0.83 mm. Hybrid fixation methods lowered early failure rates to 10%, compared with 30-40% in single-method fixations, confirming enhanced stability.
conclusionsHybrid fixation methods are more reliable than simple ones for tibial fixation. Combining IS with BB provides a biomechanically robust and cost-effective solution for ACL reconstruction. This simple, ecological and affordable method reduces early failure rates, minimizes cyclic displacement, and achieves outcomes comparable to commercial systems, offering a practical choice for improving ACL repair outcomes.
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.