ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2026
A Narrative Review of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Graft Choice and Its Influence on Return to Sport.
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.
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
purpose of reviewAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is among the most common knee injuries in active individuals and can lead to persistent instability, secondary intra-articular damage, and an elevated risk of osteoarthritis. Because return to sport (RTS) is a major goal for most active patients and graft selection remains one of the most debated aspects of ACL reconstruction, this narrative review summarizes the contemporary evidence on how graft choice influences RTS, focusing on the four most common grafts: bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB), hamstring tendon (HT), quadriceps tendon (QT), and allograft. RECENT
findingsRTS rates range from ~ 65% to 73% at three years and are higher (83-90%) in elite and high-school athletes. In young, active patients, autografts are associated with higher RTS and lower revision rates than allografts, and high-level evidence-including randomized-trial meta-analyses-has not established the superiority of any single autograft. BTB offers reliable bone-to-bone healing and low revision rates; HT reduces donor-site morbidity and anterior knee pain but has variable diameter and possible flexion weakness; and QT is a versatile option with favorable biomechanics, low donor-site morbidity, and encouraging RTS data, including in skeletally immature athletes. RTS is one of several important outcomes after ACL reconstruction, alongside long-term joint health and reinjury prevention. For RTS, the literature supports autograft over allograft in young, active patients while identifying no universally superior autograft. Graft selection should be individualized to patient age, sport, activity level, anatomy, and reinjury risk; the senior author favors QT or BTB autografts for high-demand athletes.
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.