Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42873380›Full record

ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2026

The Current State of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Graft Selection, Lateral Augmentation, Rehabilitation, and Return-to-Play.

Jeffrey George, Andrew J Moyal, Isha K Shah, Robert J Burkhart, Louis S Kang, Jacob G Calcei, James E Voos

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jeffrey GeorgeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals Drusinsky Sports Medicine Institute, 3999 Richmond Road, OH, 44122, Beachwood, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-5184-3307
Andrew J MoyalDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals Drusinsky Sports Medicine Institute, 3999 Richmond Road, OH, 44122, Beachwood, USA. Andrew.Moyal@UHhospitals.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-4826-5783
Isha K ShahDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals Drusinsky Sports Medicine Institute, 3999 Richmond Road, OH, 44122, Beachwood, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0003-5666-0470
Robert J BurkhartDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals Drusinsky Sports Medicine Institute, 3999 Richmond Road, OH, 44122, Beachwood, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1675-2365
Louis S KangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals Drusinsky Sports Medicine Institute, 3999 Richmond Road, OH, 44122, Beachwood, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-9201-734X
Jacob G CalceiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals Drusinsky Sports Medicine Institute, 3999 Richmond Road, OH, 44122, Beachwood, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4895-1046
James E VoosDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospitals Drusinsky Sports Medicine Institute, 3999 Richmond Road, OH, 44122, Beachwood, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5693-0336

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewAnterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) reliably restores anteroposterior stability; however, the rate of return to prior level of play and incidence of recurrent ACL injury have improved little over the past two decades. The purpose of this review is to describe the current state of ACLR with respect to graft selection, lateral extra-articular augmentation, rehabilitation and return to play, including the role of psychological readiness, and the specific rehabilitation protocol utilized by the senior author. RECENT

findingsGraft utilization has shifted substantially. Quadriceps tendon autograft accounted for less than 5% of primary reconstructions prior to 2014 and approximately 20% by 2023. Contemporary registry data demonstrate smaller differences in revision risk between autograft types than previously reported. Randomized and comparative data support lateral extra-articular tenodesis in selected high-risk knees, with the largest effect reported in the revision setting. Return-to-play practice has shifted from fixed timelines toward criteria-based clearance. However, a subset of athletes do not pass a full clearance battery, and some athletes who do pass and observe recommended timeframes still sustain reinjury. Limb symmetry index may overestimate functional recovery, while test batteries and thresholds vary considerably between institutions. Psychological readiness is independently associated with both return to sport and second ACL injury. Graft selection should be matched to the patient profile, and lateral augmentation should be reserved for high-risk knees. Return to play should be determined by a combination of time from surgery, functional criteria, and psychological readiness. Future study should focus on validating return-to-play criteria against reinjury endpoints and on standardizing how these criteria are defined and reported.

Indexed as

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructionGraft selectionLateral extra-articular augmentationPsychological readinessReinjuryReturn to play

Identifiers

PMID42873380
PMCPMC13669290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.