ReviewCureus2026
Patient Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Reconstruction With Hybrid Allograft Augmentation Compared With Isolated Autografts: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a common orthopedic procedure involving the replacement of a torn anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) with a graft, and current literature comparing the outcomes of different graft types remains inconclusive. The aim of this study was to compare isolated autografts and hybrid allograft/autograft grafts of various sizes to determine whether allograft augmentation provides a clinically significant benefit during ACLR by assessing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and rates of graft failure. A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis was performed, with the search conducted across three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Reviews). Quantitative data were collected regarding PROMs and rates of re-tear/revision, and a meta-analysis was performed to assess Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Tegner scores and rates of graft failure. The initial search yielded 249 studies, of which 17 met the final inclusion criteria; the included studies were published between 2015 and 2025, and 15 of the 17 were retrospective cohort studies. In terms of pooled patient outcomes, there were no clinically significant differences between hybrid grafts and isolated autografts across any of the analyzed clinical scores. Lysholm scores were statistically higher in the autograft group (weighted mean difference (WMD) 3.77, 95% CI 1.47-6.07, p=0.0013), though this difference remained below the established minimal clinically important difference; IKDC (p=0.80) and Tegner (p=0.28) scores did not differ significantly between groups. The pooled relative risk of graft failure was slightly higher in patients with hybrid grafts (risk ratio (RR) 1.24, 95% CI 0.84-1.84); however, this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.28). At the individual study level, there is literature to both support and refute the viability of hybrid ACL grafts in augmenting an autograft of insufficient diameter. However, following a comprehensive review of the literature and meta-analysis, we report a lack of clinically meaningful or statistically significant differences in clinical outcome scores and overall rates of graft failure.
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.