MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405510239 · doi:10.1002/ksa.12558

Quadriceps tendon autograft diameters are routinely above 8 mm, and preoperative size estimation before anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction may not be necessary for this graft type: A systematic review

2024· review· en· W4405510239 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua Dworsky‐Fried, Amanda Hadwen, Luca Bernardini, Prushoth Vivekanantha, Alberto Grassi, Matthieu Ollivier, Darren de

Bibliographic record

VenueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionQuadriceps tendonOrthopedic surgeryAnterior cruciate ligamentTendonPatellar ligamentSurgeryPatellar tendon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To identify values of reported quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft diameter and length in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), and to identify methods to predict these parameters. METHODS: A search was conducted across three databases from inception to 30 March 2024. Data on study characteristics, demographics, anthropometric data, imaging techniques, and QT autograft or harvested QT tendon parameters were extracted. Values quantifying the statistical strength of associations between imaging or anthropometric characteristics and graft or tendon parameters as well as for associations between these parameters and postoperative outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 3633 patients were included. The weighted mean QT autograft diameter and length were 8.9 (standard deviation [SD]: 0.7, range: 7.8-10.4) mm and 8.1 (SD: 1.3, range: 5.6-9.3) cm, respectively. A total of 93.8% of studies that reported mean QT autograft diameter found a value of 8 mm or greater. The QT groups had similar or significantly greater mean autograft diameter compared to the hamstring tendon (HT) groups in 91.7% of studies that reported significance. Regarding MRI measurements, 71.4% of the correlation coefficients reported showed a moderate positive correlation, 28.6% showed a low positive correlation and 14.3% showed a high positive correlation. Regarding anthropometric characteristics, 33.3% and 16.7%, 16.7% and 14.3% of studies that reported on the relationship between QT autograft diameter and height, weight, body mass index or age, respectively, found a low positive statistically significant correlation. Only statistically nonsignificant associations were reported between QT autograft parameters and post-operative outcomes and complications. CONCLUSIONS: QT autografts used in ACLR have a mean diameter of 8 mm or greater and are consistently larger than HT autografts. Preoperative MRI measurements are better than anthropometric characteristics at predicting QT autograft parameters; however, preoperative prediction may not be necessary for this graft type. QT autograft parameters were not found to be significantly associated with any post-operative complication or outcome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology ArthroscopySame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207