Skip to main content

Table 2 Mid- to long-term outcome measures of two techniques

From: Single-bundle versus double-bundle autologous anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials at 5-year minimum follow-up

Study N SSDa
(mm)
PS test
(N/P)
IKDC A
(Y/N)
IKDC scoresa Lysholm scoresa Tegner scoresa Graft failure (Y/N) OA changes (Y/N)
   DB SB DB SB DB SB DB SB DB SB DB SB DB SB DB SB
Jarvela (2017) [33] 47 −0.1 ± 2 0.6 ± 1.9 23/1 23/0 19/5 18/5 9 ± 2 9 ± 2 94 ± 7 95 ± 7 1/23 7/16 12/12 8/15
Beyaz (2017) [34] 31 7.1 ± 0.91 7.1 ± 0.94 81.43 ± 6.45 81.94 ± 7.15 3.43 ± 1.34 3.47 ± 1.12 7/8 5/11
Adravanti (2017) [35] 50 1.4 ± 0.6 1.3 ± 0.8 13/12 13/12 96.4 ± 17.3 94.2 ± 15.3 1/24 0/25 3/22 2/23
Karikis (2016) [36] 87 2.2 ± 2.7 2.3 ± 2.7 32/4 38/7 90.1 ± 9.1 84.3 ± 21.2 5.7 ± 1.3 5.7 ± 1.5 8/30 11/34
Zaffagnini (2011) [37] 79 1.1 ± 1.9 0.4 ± 0.6 36/4 26/13 35/5 26/13 6 ± 2 4 ± 2
  1. SSD side-to-side difference, DB double-bundle, SB single-bundle, PS pivot-shift, N/P negative/positive, IKDC International Knee Documentation Committee, Y/N yes/no, OA osteoarthritis
  2. aThe value is given as mean ± standard deviation