A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Patellar Tendon, Hamstring Tendon, and Double-Bundle ACL Reconstructions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare 3 anatomically positioned autografts for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, by measuring patient-reported disease-specific quality of life at 2 years postoperatively. DESIGN: Double-blinded, randomized clinical trial with intraoperative computer-generated treatment allocation. Patients and an independent trained evaluator were blinded. SETTING: University-based orthopedic referral practice. PATIENTS: Three hundred thirty patients (14-50 years; 183 male patients) with isolated ACL deficiency were equally randomized to: (1) patellar tendon, PT: 28.7 years (SD = 9.7); (2) quadruple-stranded hamstring tendon, HT: 28.5 years (SD = 9.9); and (3) double bundle using HT, DB: 28.3 years (SD = 9.8); 322 patients completed 2-year follow-up. INTERVENTION: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using PT, HT, or DB autografts. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measured at baseline, 1 and 2 years postoperatively-primary: anterior cruciate ligament quality-of-life scores; secondary: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, KT-1000 arthrometer, pivot shift, range of motion, Tegner activity, Cincinnati Occupational Scale, and single-leg hop. Proportions of correct graft type guesses by the patients and evaluator assessed blinding effectiveness. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were not different. Anterior cruciate ligament quality-of-life scores increased over time for all groups (P = 0.001) but were not different at 2 years (P = 0.591): PT = 84.6 (SD = 16.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 81.4-87.8), HT = 82.5 (SD = 17.7, 95% CI = 79.2-85.9), and DB = 82.4 (SD = 17.5, 95% CI = 79.1-85.7). Two-year KT-1000 side-to-side differences (PT = 1.86 mm; HT = 2.97 mm; DB = 2.65 mm) were statistically significant between PT-HT (P = 0.002) and PT-DB (P = 0.044). The remaining secondary outcomes were not statistically different. Correct graft type guesses occurred 51% of the time for patients and 46% for the evaluator. CONCLUSIONS: Two-year disease-specific quality-of-life outcome was not different between the ACL reconstruction techniques. The PT reconstructions had significantly lower side-to-side differences on static stability measures. Patient and evaluator blinding was achieved. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 1 (Therapeutic Studies). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This high-quality, large, double-blind randomized clinical trial (RCT) addresses the insufficient evidence in the literature comparing PT, single-bundle hamstring, and DB hamstring reconstructions for ACL rupture in adults. In addition to the clinical and functional results, this RCT uniquely reports on the disease-specific, patient-reported quality-of-life outcome at 2 years postoperatively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".