MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414554367 · doi:10.1186/s10195-025-00881-8

Application of internal brace ligament augmentation technique in knee ligament injury: a systematic review

2025· review· en· W4414554367 on OpenAlex
Peiyuan Tang, Xiang Tan, Ting Wen, Jun Zhang, Yusheng Li, Kai Zhang, Wenfeng Xiao

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaXiangya Hospital, Central South UniversityNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceNatural Science Foundation for Distinguished Young Scholars of Hunan ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBraceOrthopedic surgerySports medicineLigamentRheumatologyKnee Joint

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are common and can lead to significant knee instability and an increased risk of long-term cartilage damage. Given the emerging role of internal brace ligament augmentation (IBLA) in treating these injuries, this systematic review aimed to evaluate the collective evidence on the safety and effectiveness of IBLA in patients with anterior cruciate ligament injury. METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases until July 2025. The literature was screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data were extracted. The extracted key data included the International Knee Documentation Committee score (IKDC), Tegner score, Lysholm score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index score (WOMAC), Marx Activity Scale, visual analogue scale (VAS), and the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12). The quality of nonrandomized trials was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). RESULTS: Systematic screening identified 11 studies (n = 676 patients) for analysis. Patient-reported outcomes demonstrated significant improvements post-intervention. Meta-analyses demonstrated statistically significant increases in KOOS (MD = 36.86, 95% CI: 32.51-41.20, p < 0.01), VR-12 (MD = 16.62, 95% CI:14.75-18.49, p < 0.01), and decreases in visual analog scale (VAS) (MD = -2.82, 95% CI: -3.40 to -2.25, p < 0.01). Lysholm (postoperative 89-94) and IKDC scores (postoperative 85-91) approached or exceeded pre-injury levels. Tegner scores remained stable near pre-injury levels (5.33-6.4). Marx activity scores showed a significant decrease (MD = -3.84, 95% CI: -6.19 to -1.49, p < 0.01), potentially indicating postoperative activity adaptation. Study heterogeneity was noted. All included studies demonstrated mild to high quality. CONCLUSIONS: IBLA appears to be a promising technique for improving functionality, stability, and pain management in anterior cruciate ligament injury. However, the current evidence is significantly constrained by small sample sizes, a predominance of low-quality studies, and a lack of long-term comparative data. Therefore, further rigorous, high-quality research is required to definitively establish the safety and long-term effectiveness of IBLA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.338 · 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