ReviewAsia-Pacific journal of sports medicine, arthroscopy, rehabilitation and technology2026
Knee proprioception following anterior cruciate ligament repair and reconstruction: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Review in Asia-Pacific journal of sports medicine, arthroscopy, rehabilitation and technology, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Proprioception dysfunction, including deficits in joint position sense (JPS) and kinesthesia, is a common sequela following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. While previous studies have compared proprioceptive outcomes in ACL-injured patients undergoing different types of surgical reconstruction or repair, their findings have been inconsistent, and a systematic review is lacking. Objective: To summarize and evaluate proprioceptive deficits (in JPS and kinesthesia) across different postoperative time points and joint angles in patients undergoing different types of ACL reconstruction or repair, compared to healthy controls. Literature survey: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus databases using terms related to ACL injury, reconstruction or repair, and proprioception, covering all records through November 2025. Method: ology: The following information was extracted from the included articles: demographic data, sample size, selection criteria, methodology, test indicators (e.g., time points and joint angles), proprioceptive test results, and other relevant variables. Network meta-analyses were conducted to synthesize proprioceptive outcomes. Results: Nineteen studies were included in the network meta-analysis. No statistically significant differences were found in intermediate-angle JPS or kinesthesia among various ACL reconstruction and repair techniques when assessed beyond six months postoperatively. Notably, our analysis revealed that hamstring tendon autografts (SMD = 1.9, 95% CI = 0.3, 3.5) and tibialis anterior allografts (SMD = 1.7, 95% CI = 0.1, 3.5) were associated with inferior small-angle position perception outcomes at the six-month follow-up compared to control. Conclusion: The results indicate that, in small-angle position at six-month follow-up, ACL repair may yield similar or even better proprioceptive recovery compared to hamstring tendon autografts and tibialis anterior allografts. However, different types of reconstructive grafts or repairs do not show significant differences in proprioceptive recovery from most angles. These findings suggest that ACL repair demonstrates proprioceptive outcomes similar to those of ACL reconstruction, and different graft selections for ACL reconstruction may produce similar proprioceptive outcomes, allowing graft choice to be guided by specific clinical needs.
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.