ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2026
Inferior Outcomes after Subsequent Revision or Contralateral ACL Reconstruction: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports 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
Background: Outcomes after revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) have been reported as inferior to those after primary reconstruction, but evidence comparing revision and contralateral ACLR in physical activity and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during early rehabilitation remains limited. Purpose: To describe and compare rates of return to preinjury physical activity, muscle strength, and PROs between 12 and 24 months of rehabilitation in patients after primary, revision, and contralateral ACLR. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients from a rehabilitation registry who underwent ACLR were included in this cross-sectional study. They were categorized into groups, defined as primary (n = 1317), revision (n = 111), or contralateral (n = 80) ACLR. Return to physical activity was assessed using the Tegner activity scale. Muscle function was measured via isokinetic strength testing. PROs were evaluated using different questionnaires. Outcomes were compared across groups at 12, 18, and 24 months. In addition, subgroup analysis was performed, dividing patients by sex. Results: At 24 months, a significantly greater proportion of patients in the primary ACLR group had returned to their preinjury physical activity level compared with both the revision and contralateral ACLR groups (43.9% vs 27.1% and 25.7%, respectively). Patients in the primary ACLR group scored higher on different questionnaires compared to the other groups at all follow-up time points. Sex-specific analysis showed significant differences among female patients in future knee self-efficacy and quality of life, favoring primary ACLR. Conclusion: Revision and contralateral ACLR were associated with lower rates of return to preinjury physical activity levels and less favorable PROs between 12 and 24 months after reconstruction compared with primary ACLR. Differences in muscle strength were limited, and most statistically significant differences had small effect sizes, ranging from η
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.