Literature Decoded

Living reprintoriginally published in Sports Medicine 2023CC BY 4.0Read the version of record Opt out

Literature DecodedLiving reprint
Living reprint · journal article Journal version available

Return to Sports: A Risky Business? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Risk Factors for Graft Rupture Following ACL Reconstruction

Systematic review and meta-analysis first published in Sports Medicine (2023), reprinted in full under its CC BY 4.0 licence.

Anna Cronström1*ORCID iD 0000-0002-3282-6320, Eva Tengman2, Charlotte K. Häger2

1https://ror.org/05kb8h459grid.12650.300000 0001 1034 3451Department of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden; https://ror.org/012a77v79grid.4514.40000 0001 0930 2361Department of Health Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden2https://ror.org/05kb8h459grid.12650.300000 0001 1034 3451Department of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Physiotherapy, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden*Corresponding author

Reprinted 2026-10-01 28 min read Living reprint · journal article Version of record: Sports Medicine 2023Licence: CC BY 4.0

Reading mode
In plain languageSystematic review and meta-analysis first published in Sports Medicine (2023), reprinted in full under its CC BY 4.0 licence.

Systematic review and meta-analysis first published in Sports Medicine (2023), reprinted in full under its CC BY 4.0 licence.

No plain-language summary has been written for this reprint yet. The authors' abstract and full text follow, unchanged apart from layout.

Educational summary of research findings; not medical advice. Discuss care decisions with a qualified clinician.

Bottom line

What the evidence supports

How to read it

No plain-language summary has been written for this reprint yet. The authors' abstract and full text follow, unchanged apart from layout.

Limitations

The findings apply to the included study populations and may not generalise to every person or setting.

Disclaimer

Educational summary of research findings; not medical advice. Discuss care decisions with a qualified clinician.

The paper

Full manuscript

Abstract

Background

The risk of sustaining a graft rupture after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is high. Contributing risk factors are, however, still not clearly identified.

Objective

The aim of this systematic review was to identify and quantify risk factors for graft rupture after ACLR.

Methods

A systematic review with meta-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42020140129) based on PRISMA guidelines was performed. MEDLINE, CINAHL and EMBASE were searched from inception to September 2021. Prospective and retrospective studies addressing risk factors for graft rupture after ACLR in males/females of all ages were considered. Meta-analyses using a random effect model (effect measure: odds ratio [OR] with 95% confidence interval [CI]) were performed. The GRADE tool was used to assess evidence quality.

Results

Following full-text screening of 310 relevant papers, 117 were eventually included, incorporating up to 133,000 individuals in each meta-analysis. Higher Tegner activity level (≥ 7 vs < 7) at primary injury (OR 3.91, 95% CI 1.69–9.04), increased tibial slope (degrees) (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.26–3.86), lower psychological readiness to return to sport (RTS) (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.32–3.61), early surgery (< 12 vs ≥ 12 months) (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.58–2.22), RTS (pre-injury level) (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.21–2.91) and family history of ACL injury (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.34–2.31) were all associated with increased odds of graft rupture. Higher age (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.39–0.59), female sex (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79–0.98), fewer self-reported knee symptoms pre-reconstruction (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69–0.95) and concomitant cartilage injuries (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62–0.79) instead decreased the odds. Meta-analysis revealed no association between body mass index, smoking, joint laxity, RTS time, knee kinematics, muscle strength or hop performance and graft rupture.

Conclusion

Conspicuous risk factors for graft rupture were mainly sports and hereditary related. Few studies investigated function-related modifiable factors or included sports exposure data.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40279-022-01747-3.

Key Points

Table 1.
This systematic review with meta-analysis provides evidence that high activity level, young age, lower psychological readiness, and increased tibial slope are risk factors for graft ruptures following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
Females seem to have lower risk of sustaining a graft rupture compared with males.
Having been little explored, future studies should focus on neuromuscular function and psychological aspects as potential risk factors, since these may be modifiable by training or other interventions.

Background

Injury to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is common among athletes1, 2 and often leads to functional impairments, failure to return to sport (RTS) and terminated athletic careers3, 4. Surgical reconstruction of the ACL (ACLR) is an increasingly common treatment after injury with an increase in incidence in the US from 40.9 per 10,000 patients in 2004 to 47.8 in 20095. However, the risk of sustaining a graft rupture after ACLR remains high. Wiggins et al., reported in a systematic review and meta-analysis that approximately 10% of the individuals aged < 25 years who returned to their pre-injury activity level after primary ACLR suffered a secondary ACL injury to their ipsi-lateral knee6. A subsequent graft rupture may lead to further substantial decline in function and in quality of life, as well as to increased risk of early onset of knee osteoarthritis7–10. Still, risk factors associated with graft rupture remain largely unknown.

Prominent risk factors for primary ACL injury are female sex, increased joint laxity as well as aberrant neuromuscular and biomechanical movement patterns, such as deficits in neuromuscular control of the trunk and lower extremity and higher ground reaction forces during landing11. Further, as we reported in a recent systematic review, RTS is the risk factor with the strongest association with sustaining a secondary injury to the ACL of the contralateral leg (C-ACL). Notably, athletes who returned to a high activity level (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] questionnaire, level 1–2) or sports including cutting and pivoting were more likely to sustain a C-ACL injury than those who did not return at all or returned to a lower activity level (odds ratio [OR] 3.3)12. Other risk factors for future C-ACL injuries included female sex, age 18 years or younger, family history of ACL injury, and early (≤ 3 months) primary ACL reconstruction. However, it is not known if and if so, to what extent, the factors that contribute to graft ruptures overlap with the risk factors for primary and C-ACL injury. Even when passing certain criteria for sensorimotor function following rehabilitation, there may still be an increased risk of C-ACL injury, while the risk for graft rupture is reduced13. Also, while females are reported to have a higher risk of primary and C-ACL injury compared with men11, 12, they seem to have lower risk of graft rupture14. It is important to further disentangle specific risk factors for graft rupture after primary ACL injury in order to identify high-risk individuals. Such knowledge will further facilitate the design of training and rehabilitation protocols aiming at risk reduction for secondary injuries following ACL rupture. Previous narrative15 and systematic reviews6, 14, 16–18 on risk factors for graft rupture focus either on specific risk factors, such as sex14, 17, or only include specific subgroups of studies, such as younger participants16 or registry studies18. To our knowledge, there are no previous studies synthesizing all risk factors for graft rupture without population restrictions. Hence, the aim of this systematic review was to identify and quantify risk factors related to demographics/characteristics, injury, timing of surgery, activity, biomechanics, joint geometry/skeletal maturity, function and patient-reported outcomes that are associated with sustaining a future graft rupture.

Methods

Literature Search and Study Selection

This systematic review was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines19, 20 and was pre-registered (PROSPERO: CRD42020140129).

Search Strategy

A systematic search was performed from inception to January 2020 (updated in September 2021) in the following databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL and EMBASE with search terms incorporating different aspects of secondary ACL injuries and associated risk factors, previously published in full12 (Online resource 1, see electronic supplementary material [ESM]). Reference lists of all relevant articles were subsequently manually searched for additional studies.

Eligibility Criteria

All studies meeting the following criteria were considered for inclusion: (1) prospective or retrospective studies with any follow-up duration; (2) inclusion of males and/or females of any age with primary ACLR (any graft/surgery technique); (3) assessment of any factor related to demographics/characteristics, injury, timing of surgery, activity/sport, biomechanics, joint geometry/skeletal maturity, function and patient-reported outcomes at baseline; and (4) recording of at least three graft ruptures, defined as clinically verified, MRI verified or self-reported graft rupture or as revision surgery during the study period. Exclusion criteria were (1) animal studies and in vitro studies; (2) case studies, conference abstracts, review papers and editorials; (3) external risk factors, such as weather, equipment, playing surface or possible risk factors related to type of graft and/or surgery technique; and (4) published in a language other than English or a Scandinavian language.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

All abstracts and full texts were independently screened according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria by two of the authors of this review (AC and ET) using the Covidence software (Veritas Health Innovation). Any disagreements were resolved by a consensus discussion between AC and ET, and if required with the third author (CH). The following data were extracted from the studies: authors, publication date, country, number of participants, sex, age, activity level, number of graft ruptures, time to graft rupture, graft type, follow-up period (years), assessed risk factor/s and effect measure/s. If there were not sufficient data to perform meta-analysis reported in a study, study authors were contacted with a request for additional information if the study was published within the last 10 years. A meta-analysis was performed if there were two or more studies that included the same risk factor for sustaining a graft rupture.

Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software, version 2.2.064 (Englewood, USA) was used for meta-analysis. The odds ratio (95% CI) for each risk factor for sustaining a graft rupture was chosen as the effect measure. The odds ratio was primarily calculated from the number of events and sample size in each group or from mean (SD) as appropriate. If not reported, the reported unadjusted univariable odds ratio was used if available. A random effect model was used because of expected heterogeneity between studies, regarding sex, age, graft types, physical activity level and time duration of follow-up. All meta-analyses and corresponding forest plots were weighted under the random effect model, taking both within-study variance and between-study variance (Tau2) into account21. The Q test and corresponding I2-statistics were used to calculate the between-study effect measure heterogeneity22. A 95% confidence interval excluding the null value of 1 was considered a statistically significant result. For studies reporting associated meniscal injuries/surgeries as risk factors for graft rupture, the results for any meniscal injury/surgery (medial or lateral injury) were included in the meta-analysis. If medial and lateral injury/surgery was reported separately, the result for the lateral side was included since the lateral meniscus is most frequently injured in conjunction with acute ACL injury23. In studies reporting data from more than one measuring technique for assessing tibial slope (i.e., anterior, posterior, central slope) in the same participants, the number of participants included in the primary analysis was divided by the number of measuring techniques reported, and each measuring technique was then treated as an independent study24. All the cut-off values applied for all the variables in this review (e.g., age ≥ 18 vs < 18 years) were based on those reported in the individual studies.

Subgroup analysis for children/adolescents (C&A) (aged ≤ 19 years) and adults (aged > 19 years) were performed if two or more studies investigated the same risk factor for graft rupture.

Risk of Bias, Publication Bias and Quality of Evidence Assessments

Two of the authors (AC and ET) independently assessed all included studies for risk of bias using the Quality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool25, 26 (Online resource 2, see ESM). If consensus was not reached, further discussions with the third author (CH) were conducted to resolve any disagreements. If the meta-analysis included at least 10 studies and the corresponding I2 was ≤ 50%, funnel plots with trim and fill were used to evaluate any publication bias27, 28. The quality of evidence for each risk factor was likewise assessed by both AC and ET using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) for prognostic studies29, 30 and discussed among all authors. The QUIPS and GRADE assessments were added after the PROSPERO protocol registration.

Results

The systematic search yielded a total of 4493 articles, and another 33 articles were identified by manual search. Of these, 310 full-text papers were then screened according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria and 131 were further excluded. In addition, 52 studies pooled the results for graft rupture with C-ACL injury, or reported the results according to different surgery techniques instead of according to graft rupture/no graft rupture10, 31–81. Five of these studies31–35 were published > 10 years ago and the authors were therefore not contacted. The authors of the remaining 47 studies were contacted by email and data for graft rupture, specifically, were provided for nine studies36, 39, 41, 43, 46, 48, 49, 77, 79. Twelve studies82–93 reported partly on the same participants taken from the Nordic knee ligament registries. Of these, we included one study that included data from all registries (Sweden, Norway, Denmark)88 and another two studies reporting on specific data not included in the first study (patient-reported outcomes, timing of surgery82 and RTS92). Data from 15 other studies were also partly reported on in previous publications94–105106–108. Of those, the studies with the largest sample size, the most included risk factors and/or reporting statistics allowing calculation of ORs were included94, 97, 101, 104, 106. Altogether, 117 articles were included in this review9, 36, 39, 41, 43, 46, 48, 49, 72, 73, 77, 79, 82, 88, 92, 94, 97, 101, 104, 106, 109–205 (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Flow chart of the inclusion process

Study Characteristics

Twelve of the included articles185–196 were not eligible for meta-analysis (e.g., only one study assessing the specific risk factor or reported statistics not possible to calculate as odds ratios). The characteristics and results of these studies are reported in Online resource 3 (see ESM). Consequently, 105 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Seventy-three studies reported on sex, 45 on age, 27 on activity level and/or sports participation, 21 on associated injuries, 14 on body mass index (BMI), 11 on family history, 12 on tibial slope, five on smoking status, four on timing of surgery, four on contact/non-contact injury mechanism, four on hop performance and two on general laxity, growth plate status, femoral condyle ratio, patient-reported outcomes, number of physiotherapy visits, kinematics, muscle strength and psychological readiness to RTS, respectively, (see Online resource 4, Table 1, in the ESM for characteristics of each individual study included in the meta-analyses). Thirty-one of these studies also included additional risk factors not eligible for meta-analysis (e.g., only one study assessing the specific risk factor). The results for these specific factors are also reported in Online resource 3 (see ESM).

Synthesis of Results

Meta-analyses consisting of between two and 73 studies (n = 108–133,128) were performed separately for 42 potential risk factors for graft rupture. Sixteen risk factors were rated as moderate quality, 12 as low and 14 as very low-quality evidence according to GRADE (Table 1).

Table 1. Quality of evidence of the included risk factors according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)
Risk factorGRADE criteria
Phase of investigationRisk of biasInconsistencyIndirectnessImpressionPublication biasUpgrading factorsGRADE quality of evidenceSummary of findings
Age ≥ 18 vs < 18 years+++x−xxx++++Age < 18 years associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Age ≥ 20 vs < 20 years+++x−xxx++++Age < 20 years associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Age ≥ 25 vs < 25 years+++x–xxx+++Age < 25 years associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Age ≥ 30 vs < 30 years+++x−xxx++++Age < 30 years associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Age continuous+++x–xxx++++Lower age associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Sex+++xxx−xx++Females had lower odds of graft rupture
Marx score at primary injury+++x–x−xx−No association
Tegner score at primary injury+++xxx−xx++Higher score associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Tegner score at primary injury ≥ 7 vs < 7+++xxx−x++++Score ≥ 7 associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Lateral tibial slope+++x–xxxx+Increased tibial slope associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Medial tibial slope+++x−x−xx+No association
Femoral condyle ratio+++xxx−xx++No association
Duration between injury and surgery ≥ 12 vs < 12 months+++xxxxxx+++Surgery < 12 months associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Duration between injury and surgery ≥ 6 vs < 6 months+++−xx−xx+No association
Duration between injury and surgery ≥ 3 vs < 3 months+++x−xxxx++No association
Return to pre-injury activity level (RTS)+++xxxxxx+++RTS associated with higher risk of graft rupture
Family history of ACL injury+++xxxxxx+++Family history associated with higher risk of graft rupture
KOOS ADL+++xxxxxx+++No association
KOOS pain+++xxxxxx+++No association
KOOS QoL+++xxxxxx+++No association
KOOS sport/recreation+++xxxxxx+++No association
KOOS symptom+++xxx−xx++Higher score associated with decreased odds of graft rupture
Psychological readiness to RTS+++−xx−−x−Lower readiness associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Concomitant cartilage injury+++xxxxxx+++Cartilage injury associated with higher odds of graft rupture
Concomitant meniscal tear+++xxxxxx+++No association
Concomitant meniscal repair+++x−xxxx++No association
Concomitant meniscectomy+++xxxxxx+++No association
Concomitant MCL injury+++xxxxxx+++No association
BMI ≥ 25 vs < 25 kg/m2+++−–xxxx−No association
BMI+++x–xxxx+No association
Smoking status+++x−xxxx++No association
Contact vs non-contact mechanism of primary injury+++x−x−xx+No association
General joint laxity+++−–x−xx−No association
Growth plate status+++x−x−xx+No association
Number of physical therapy visits+++xxx−xx++No association
Timing of RTS ≥ 6 vs < 6 months+++−xx−xx−No association
Type of sport (soccer vs other sports)+++x−xxxx++No association
Hop performance (SLHD)+++xxx−xx++No association
Hop performance (THD)+++−xx−xx+No association
Knee abduction+++xxx−xx++No association
Q-ceps peak torque+++−xx−xx+No association
Hamstring peak torque+++−xx−xx+No association

GRADE criteria: +++ = phase III studies, x = no serious limitations, – = moderate limitations, − = serious limitations, + = upgrade by one. GRADE quality: ++++ = high, +++ = moderate, ++ = low, ± = very low quality of evidence

ACL anterior cruciate ligament, ADL activities of daily living, BMI body mass index, KOOS Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, MCL medial collateral ligament, Q-ceps quadriceps, QoL quality of life, RTS return to sport, SLHD single-leg hop for distance, THD triple hop for distance

Seven key factors were identified to increase the odds of future graft rupture after ACLR: (1) high activity level with the odds being almost four times higher for those having a Tegner score of ≥ 7 compared with those scoring < 7 at the primary injury (OR 3.91, 95% CI 1.69–9.04, moderate quality evidence); (2) young age (dichotomous variable), with the odds being 2.6–3.5 times higher for those aged < 18–30 years compared with ≥ 18–30 years, respectively (OR 2.59–3.53, 95% CI 1.51–5.55, low to moderate quality evidence); (3) increased lateral tibial slope (degrees) (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.26–3.86, very low quality evidence); (4) lower psychological readiness to RTS (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.32–3.61, very low quality evidence); (5) surgery within 12 months compared with surgery ≥ 12 months post-injury (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.58–2.22, moderate quality evidence); (6) returning to pre-injury activity level (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.21–2.91, moderate quality evidence); and finally, (7) family history of ACL injury (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.34–2.31, moderate quality evidence) (Online resource 5, Figs. 1–7, see ESM). In addition, higher age (continuous variable) (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.38–0.59, moderate quality evidence), female sex (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79–0.98, low quality evidence), better pre-reconstruction score on the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) (symptom subscale) (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69–0.95, low quality evidence) and concomitant cartilage injury (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62–0.79, moderate quality evidence) decreased the odds of sustaining a graft rupture (Online resource 5, Figs. 2, 8–10, see ESM). The following factors were found not to be associated with future graft rupture: BMI, smoking status, contact versus non-contact injury mechanism, medial tibial slope, general joint laxity, pre-reconstruction KOOS score (subscales: pain, activities of daily living, quality of life, sport/recreation), timing of surgery (≥ 3 vs < 3 months or ≥ 6 vs < 6 months), number of physical therapy visits, timing of RTS (≥ 6 vs < 6 months), playing soccer compared with other sports, Marx activity score at primary injury, hop performance, quadriceps strength, hamstring strength, knee abduction after RTS, concomitant meniscal or medial collateral ligament injuries or femoral condyle ratio (Online resource 5, Fig. 7, 11–26, see ESM).

Subgroup Analysis

Sex was the sole variable eligible for meta-analysis for the adults. No difference in the odds of sustaining a graft rupture was observed between males and females if only adults were considered (Online resource 5, Fig. 27, see ESM).

Of the factors eligible for meta-analysis in the subgroup of C&A, a family history of ACL injury (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.13–3.64) was associated with a higher odds of future graft rupture, whereas female sex decreased the odds (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57–0.89) (Online resource 5, Figs. 7 and 27, see ESM). On the other hand, the following factors were not associated with the odds of sustaining a future graft rupture in this population: age, BMI, return to pre-injury activity level, growth plate status and concomitant meniscal injury (Online resource 5, Figs. 7, 22–23, 28–30, see ESM).

Risk of Bias and Heterogeneity

Sex, family history, RTS and concomitant meniscal tear were the only variables eligible for assessment of publication bias. The funnel plots with trim and fill imputations showed no difference in effect measure, indicating no publication bias for either of the variables as risk factors for graft rupture27 (Online resource 6, Figs. 1–4, see ESM).

Fifty-eight (50%) studies were rated as low risk of bias, 17 (14%) as moderate and 42 (36%) as high risk of bias (Online resource 6, Table 1, see ESM). After sensitivity analyses were performed, excluding articles with high risk of bias206, a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 decreased the odds of sustaining a graft rupture. No other differences in the results were observed (Online resource 7, Table 1, see ESM).

I2 ranged between < 0.001% and 92% for all meta-analyses, indicating low to high heterogeneity between studies22 (Online resource 5, Figs. 3–30, see ESM).

Discussion

This systematic review and meta-analysis identified the following factors as associated with graft rupture with moderate quality evidence: a higher pre-injury activity level, younger age (< 20 years), family history of ACL injury, surgery performed within 12 months and RTS. Increased lateral tibial slope and lower psychological readiness to RTS were also associated with sustaining a future graft rupture but with very low to low quality evidence. Female sex decreased the odds (low quality evidence). On the other hand, factors such as smoking status, joint laxity, timing of RTS, kinematics, knee muscle strength and hop performance were not associated with future graft rupture. Few studies investigated factors related to sensorimotor function and neuromuscular control.

A pre-primary injury Tegner score of ≥ 7 compared with a lower activity level was associated with the highest odds (OR 3.91) of sustaining a graft rupture. In addition, and in line with our previous review on risk factors for C-ACL injury12, return to pre-injury activity level after ACLR was associated with almost twice the odds of future graft rupture, whereas the time point of RTS (< 6 vs ≥ 6 months), or playing soccer compared with other sports, were not related to graft rupture. A high activity level has previously been linked to an increased risk of ACL injury37, and individuals who have a higher Tegner score prior to their primary injury are reported to be more likely to return to their pre-injury activity level compared with those initially active on a lower level207. Taken together, these results corroborate that participating in and returning to a high activity level that imposes substantial load on the knees leads to a higher risk of graft rupture, irrespective of time point of return and the sports involved. While the pre-injury Marx score was not significantly associated with graft rupture, the Marx score was reported in only two studies and has poorer psychometric properties208, which may explain differences in the result between these two scales of activity level/participation.

Extending the result from a recent meta-analysis reporting younger age to be a risk factor for C-ACL injury12, younger age was likewise associated with a higher odds of graft rupture in the current review. Those younger than 20 years had an odds ratio of 3.53 for sustaining a future graft rupture compared with those older than 20 years. The fact that the anatomical structures and neuromuscular system are still under development during adolescence may partly explain why young individuals have a greater risk209, 210. Secondly, athletes younger than 20 years are often involved in sport at a higher level150 and also seem to return to sport to a greater extent51, 104, 157 without having achieved proper knee function211 compared with older athletes, which also likely contributes to an increased risk in these young individuals. This reasoning is further supported by the absence of any association between age and graft rupture in the analysis including only those aged 19 and younger, when most athletes may return to a more competitive and knee challenging sports level.

In accordance with research on risk factors for both primary119, 169, 212 and C-ACL injury12, the current data revealed that those with a parent and/or sibling who had suffered an ACL injury had higher odds (OR 1.76) of sustaining a graft rupture compared with those with no family history of ACL injury. This was true for both adults and those of younger age. Many factors that predispose individuals to knee injury may be hereditary. Suggested explanations may be related to specific gene polymorphisms213 and/or inherited anatomical, biomechanical and neuromuscular factors119, 214. In line with research that reported increased MRI-verified lateral, but not medial tibial slope to be associated with primary ACL injury215, the current meta-analysis showed that individuals with a greater lateral tibial slope had higher odds of sustaining a graft rupture, whereas there was no association for medial slope. Greater lateral compared with medial slope is suggested to increase anterior tibial translation as well as internal rotation during functional activity, which consequently may increase ACL strain216–220. Furthermore, while we found no relation between general joint laxity and graft rupture risk in the current review, Hewett et al. followed two fraternal female twins from baseline screening to when they both sustained an ACL injury and reported both twins to have increased joint laxity, altered joint biomechanics during movement, such as increased knee abduction and reduced knee flexion, and altered muscle activation pattern214. Another suggested explanation for the association between a positive family history and ACL injury may be a familial inclination for sport participation119. In-depth approaches are, however, warranted regarding which specific hereditary factors have the strongest links to increased primary and secondary ACL injury risk.

Performing ACLR within 12 months from injury increased the odds of sustaining a graft rupture by 87% compared with delayed surgery (≥ 12 months). In contrast to our previous review where a higher risk of sustaining a C-ACL injury was reported for those who received an ACLR within 3 months12, no difference in graft rupture rate was observed for other surgery time point cut-offs (≥ 3 vs < 3 months or ≥ 6 vs < 6 months). An early reconstruction has previously been associated with a higher post-operative activity level221 and it is plausible that the group that delayed reconstruction for 12 months or more represents a group of individuals that have a lower pre-injury activity level and/or may not return to their pre-injury activity level and, thus, are less likely to put their knee at risk. Individuals delaying surgery > 12 months may also represent a group of so called ‘copers’, that is, being able to RTS with excellent dynamic knee stability after ACLR222. A recent study has shown that copers have approximately three times the odds of rehabilitation success, including lower graft rupture rate, compared with non-copers223, which may partly explain our result.

Similar to our previous review on C-ACL injury12, the meta-analysis showed that concomitant cartilage injury at the time of primary injury decreased the odds of sustaining a future graft rupture, whereas no such association was observed for meniscal injuries. Given that individuals with concomitant cartilage injury are reported to have decreased self-reported knee function, worse knee symptoms, lower quadriceps muscle strength and reduced activity level post-surgery compared with those without cartilage damage118, 224–226, these individuals may not return to sport and thereby decrease the risk of re-injury to either knee. The relationships between meniscal injury/other concomitant injuries, activity level and post-surgery function are not unscrambled225, 226 and such complexities may underlie the lack of association between meniscal injuries and graft rupture in the current analysis. Further studies are needed to disentangle the possible association between concomitant injuries, related functional impairment, failure to RTS and second ACL injuries.

In contrast to previous research reporting female sex to be a risk factor for sustaining both a primary ACL injury1, 227–230 and a C-ACL injury12, females had lower odds of sustaining a graft rupture in the current review when both adults and C&A were included in the meta-analysis. This result is in accordance with a recent systematic review that reported females to have lower absolute risk of sustaining a graft rupture compared with males14. Hormonal sex differences as well as neuromuscular differences in muscle activation pattern and postural control have been suggested to contribute to the higher risk of ACL injuries in females11, 231. This indicates that such factors may play a role in primary injury and that a C-ACL injury may in fact be considered as a primary injury to the contra-lateral leg, whereas other factors may be important for graft rupture. The subgroup analyses further showed that when only adults were included in the analysis, there was no sex difference in the odds of sustaining a graft rupture but that the odds for sustaining a graft rupture for females decreased even more when only those age 19 and younger were considered, indicating that the apparent sex difference is mostly driven by young individuals. This is also supported by a recent systematic review that reported males to have a higher risk of graft rupture than females in individuals younger than 20 years of age16. It is known that young males return to sport both earlier, more often and to a higher level compared with their female counterparts51, which may explain why young males had higher odds of graft rupture than young females. However, in the current review there was no effect of RTS on graft rupture in the subgroup for C&A, which may contradict this hypothesis. It should be noted though, that this particular subgroup analysis (i.e., RTS) included very few studies (n = 3), and that the OR (1.72) was quite similar to the OR (1.91) for the full analysis. Furthermore, young males seemed to undergo ACLR using a physeal-sparing technique due to skeletal immaturity and open growth plates to a higher extent than females, which has been suggested to influence graft rupture rate in young males232. Neither surgical technique232 nor growth-plate status seemed, however, to be associated with graft rupture when males and females were pooled (Online resource 5, Fig. 30, see ESM) or stratified by sex177.

In a previous systematic review, a BMI < 25 kg/m2 was associated with higher odds of sustaining a future C-ACL injury, whereas smoking status did not seem to be related to C-ACL injury12. Individuals with a high BMI and smokers have been reported to have lower activity levels and worse symptoms and self-reported function after ACLR compared with those with a lower BMI and non-smokers221. Notwithstanding, our results did not support any relationship between either BMI or smoking status and future graft rupture. However, when excluding one study with high risk of bias from the meta-analysis, a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2 was associated with decreased odds of sustaining a graft rupture, indicating that any relation between BMI and graft rupture is still to be verified.

Knee kinematics, kinetics, knee muscle strength, hop performance and self-reported outcomes, such as knee confidence, have previously been linked to the risk of second ACL injuries (graft ruptures and C-ACL injuries combined)31, 40, 50, 233. In the current review, few articles on objective and self-reported function as risk factors for graft rupture as a separate entity were eligible for meta-analysis (too few studies on same factor assessed at same time point or pooling of graft rupture and C-ACL injury). Psychological factors, such as negative emotions, stress, lack of knee confidence and fear of re-injury are commonly reported after ACL injury234–237 and may have a negative impact on both the rehabilitation process235 and RTS rate237. Lower psychological readiness to RTS, as assessed with the ACL Return to Sport after Injury scale238, 9–12 months post-reconstruction was associated with higher odds of sustaining a future graft rupture in the current meta-analysis. In addition, Paterno et al.192 reported those with kinesiophobia to be more prone to rupture of the reconstructed ACL (Online resource 3, see ESM). This result further highlights the importance of incorporating psychological aspects into the rehabilitation process after knee injury.

Similar to the findings for primary ACL injury239, 240, we found no association between peak knee abduction angle during drop landing and the odds of future graft rupture. Notably, the two studies included in this analysis used different measures to assess knee abduction (2D vs 3D) during slightly different tasks (one-leg vs double-leg drop landing). Although 2D and 3D measures of knee abduction seem closely related241–243 and the knee abduction angle is proposed to be similar during the execution of single-leg and double-leg landings244, 245, it is possible that these differences obscured the results of the separate studies. Given this and the few studies included in the analysis, the result for knee abduction angle should be interpreted with caution. Furthermore, the meta-analyses revealed no relation between the performance of the single and triple hop for distance or hamstring and quadriceps peak torque, respectively, and future graft rupture. On the other hand, Kyritsis et al., reported lower hamstring to quadriceps ratio when returning to sport to be associated with a higher risk of graft rupture130 (Online resource 3, see ESM) and better KOOS score on the symptom subscale decreased the odds of graft rupture in our analysis (no associations for other subscales). The few studies included in these analyses (n = 2–4) highlight the lack of studies that include the same measures of sensorimotor function or psychological aspects as potential risk factors for graft rupture. Standardized objective and self-reported measures on function and psychological constructs that are responsive to training/intervention, in contrast to demographic factors that are non-modifiable by nature, should thus be considered in future studies on risk factors for secondary knee injuries. This is a prerequisite to fully understand the role of the neuromuscular and psychological factors in the risk of graft rupture after ACLR.

ACL injuries are most frequent in sports, and re-injury incidence is very high6. According to the results from this review, the aspects of being a highly active sport athlete, < 20 years, male, and having low psychological readiness to RTS were among the factors associated with higher odds of graft rupture. Clinicians should be prepared to meet the needs of young highly active sports athletes, incorporating psychological aspects into the rehabilitation after ACLR. Being able to RTS after injury is also closely related to the athletic and personal identity246–248, as well as to regaining long-term quality of life7, 249. In light of this and of the International Olympic Committees’ “Athletes’ Rights and Responsibilities Declaration” (Right #7 of the Preamble)250, athlete rehabilitation efforts post-ACLR as well as future research should focus on a safe return to sport to reduce the high risk of re-injury in athletes.

In this systematic review, we included all studies that assessed risk factors for graft rupture without any restrictions related to either participant demographics, sport exposure, graft type or year of publication, which also increases the generalizability of our findings. Other strengths of our review are the very high number of individuals in most of the meta-analyses (up to 133,000).

However, there are several limitations. Our review includes studies with different definitions of graft rupture, such as clinically or MRI verified ruptures as well as revision surgery identified from surgical records. It is possible that using only revision surgery as outcome may underestimate the graft rupture rate and consequently influence the result of the meta-analysis, since this approach will not capture those who chose to have non-surgical treatment of their second injury. We also pooled studies on males and females and different age groups, but have performed subgroup analysis to account for possible differences between C&A populations and adults. Since only seven of the 117 included articles reported solely on males (n = 4) or females (n = 3) and all other articles included both sexes, we do not believe that this had any major influence on our result. An additional limitation is that we pooled studies including different types of grafts and surgery techniques for ACLR. Since most of the included studies comprised a mixture of different graft types/surgery techniques or did not report graft type at all, we chose to not perform subgroup analysis for graft type. Although assessing graft type and surgery technique as possible risk factors was beyond the scope of this study, research indicates an advantage for autograft versus allograft and patella graft versus hamstring graft in the risk of graft failure251, 252, which may be considered in future research. While most of our meta-analyses were associated with low to moderate heterogeneity, a few analyses—age (continuous, ≥ 25 vs < 25 years), BMI, Marx activity scale, lateral tibial slope and general joint laxity—had high heterogeneity measured with I2 statistics (≥ 75%)22. To account for expected heterogeneity, we performed all meta-analyses under the random effect model that incorporates both within-study and between-study variance in the analysis. It should also be noted that most analyses with high heterogeneity included a low number of studies, which may lead to bias of the I2 statistics253. Thus, the I2 statistics for these specific studies should be interpreted with caution. The mechanisms contributing to ACL injury and graft rupture are most likely multifactorial and incorporate a combination of both demographic factors, such as family history and age, as well as factors related to neuromuscular control and sensorimotor function11 and cannot be entirely explained by single factors. Other important factors are RTS status and sports exposure. Since we included all studies assessing risk factors for graft rupture, regardless of sports exposure or RTS status, most studies did not provide such information. It has been suggested that, for example, the relation between young age and a higher risk of second ACL injury is more dependent on the higher RTS rate in young individuals than age38. Applying a multifactorial model for assessing risk factors for graft rupture was beyond the scope of the current review but it cannot be ruled out that the result for some factors would have been different if several possible risk factors, including RTS status and sports exposure, had been considered in the same model. We do, however, believe that this review could be a starting point for exploring more complex models incorporating all relevant factors for assessing graft rupture risk in future studies. Finally, we used OR as outcome measure in all analyses and the results should, thus, not be interpreted as equal to the risk of sustaining a future graft rupture254.

Conclusion

This systematic review with meta-analysis provides evidence that high activity level, RTS, young age, low psychological readiness to RTS, family history of ACL injury, surgery performed within 12 months, and increased tibial slope are all factors related to increased odds of sustaining a future graft rupture. Females seem, however, to have lower odds of graft rupture compared with males. Studies including modifiable risk factors such as neuromotor control were rare. We recommend that future attention in research should be given to factors such as muscle strength and activation, sensorimotor control and movement quality as well as psychological factors, all of which may be responsive to training/intervention, and thus able to be incorporated into rehabilitation protocols aiming at reducing the risk of further knee injuries after ACL injury and facilitating a safe RTS for ACL-injured individuals.

Section 7

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material — available with the version of record.

Supplementary material — available with the version of record.

Supplementary material — available with the version of record.

Supplementary material — available with the version of record.

Supplementary material — available with the version of record.

Supplementary material — available with the version of record.

Supplementary material — available with the version of record.

Declarations

Declarations

Open access funding provided by Umeå University. This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council for Sport Science (P2019-0011, D2019-0005), The Gyllenstierna Krapperup´s Foundation and Lennander’s Foundation.

Anna Cronström, Eva Tengman and Charlotte K. Häger declare that they have no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this review.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Not applicable.

AC contributed to the conception and design of the study, performed the statistical analyses and was in charge of writing the manuscript. ET and CKH contributed to the conception and design of the study, helped in the interpretation of the statistical analyses and provided feedback on drafts of this paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Sources

References

254 references, in the article's own order. Citation numbers in the text are this list's numbers (112 records are cited).

  1. The epidemiology of anterior cruciate ligament injury in football (soccer): a review of the literature from a gender-related perspective

    Walden M, Hagglund M, Werner J, Ekstrand J

    2011Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(1):3–10 · PMID 20532868doi:10.1007/s00167-010-1172-7

  2. The effects of level of competition, sport, and sex on the incidence of first-time noncontact anterior cruciate ligament injury

    Beynnon BD, Vacek PM, Newell MK, Tourville TW, Smith HC, Shultz SJ, Slauterbeck JR, Johnson RJ

    2014Am J Sports Med 42(8):1806–1812 · PMID 25016012doi:10.1177/0363546514540862

  3. Return to play, performance, and career duration after anterior cruciate ligament rupture: a case–control study in the five biggest football nations in Europe

    Niederer D, Engeroff T, Wilke J, Vogt L, Banzer W

    2018Scand J Med Sci Sports 28(10):2226–2233 · PMID 29927499doi:10.1111/sms.13245

  4. Consequences of a ligament injury on neuromuscular function and relevance to rehabilitation—using the anterior cruciate ligament-injured knee as model

    Ageberg E

    2002J Electromyogr Kinesiol 12(3):205–212 · PMID 12086815doi:10.1016/S1050-6411(02)00022-6

  5. Trends and demographics in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the United States

    Leathers MP, Merz A, Wong J, Scott T, Wang JC, Hame SL

    2015J Knee Surg 28(5):390–394 · PMID 25635874doi:10.1055/s-0035-1544193

  6. Risk of secondary injury in younger athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Wiggins AJ, Grandhi RK, Schneider DK, Stanfield D, Webster KE, Myer GD

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(7):1861–1876 · PMID 26772611doi:10.1177/0363546515621554

  7. Return to sport matters-longer-term quality of life after ACL reconstruction in people with knee difficulties

    Filbay SR, Ackerman IN, Russell TG, Crossley KM

    2016Scand J Med Sci Sports 27:514–524 · PMID 27167588doi:10.1111/sms.12698

  8. Quality of life in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Filbay SR, Culvenor AG, Ackerman IN, Russell TG, Crossley KM

    2015Br J Sports Med 49(16):1033–1041 · PMID 26224582doi:10.1136/bjsports-2015-094864

  9. A 10-year comparison of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions with hamstring tendon and patellar tendon autograft: a controlled, prospective trial

    Pinczewski LA, Lyman J, Salmon LJ, Russell VJ, Roe J, Linklater J

    2007Am J Sports Med 35(4):564–574 · PMID 17261567doi:10.1177/0363546506296042

  10. KOOS pain as a marker for significant knee pain two and six years after primary ACL reconstruction: a Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) prospective longitudinal cohort study

    Wasserstein D, Huston LJ, Nwosu S, Kaeding CC, Parker RD, Wright RW, Andrish JT, Marx RG, Amendola A, Wolf BR, et al.

    2015Osteoarthritis Cartil 23(10):1674–1684 · PMID 26072385doi:10.1016/j.joca.2015.05.025

  11. Mechanisms, prediction, and prevention of ACL injuries: cut risk with three sharpened and validated tools

    Hewett TE, Myer GD, Ford KR, Paterno MV, Quatman CE

    2016J Orthop Res 34(11):1843–1855 · PMID 27612195doi:10.1002/jor.23414

  12. Risk factors for contra-lateral secondary anterior cruciate ligament injury: a systematic review with meta-analysis

    Cronström A, Tengman E, Häger CK

    2021Sports Med. 51(7):1419–1438 · PMID 33515391doi:10.1007/s40279-020-01424-3

  13. What is the evidence for and validity of return-to-sport testing after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis

    Webster KE, Hewett TE

    2019Sports Med 49(6):917–929 · PMID 30905035doi:10.1007/s40279-019-01093-x

  14. Does sex affect second ACL injury risk? A systematic review with meta-analysis

    Patel AD, Bullock GS, Wrigley J, Paterno MV, Sell TC, Losciale JM

    2021Br J Sports Med 55(15):873–882 · PMID 34001504doi:10.1136/bjsports-2020-103408

  15. Minimizing the risk of graft failure after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in athletes. A narrative review of the current evidence

    Costa GG, Perelli S, Grassi A, Russo A, Zaffagnini S, Monllau JC

    2022J Exp Orthop 9(1):26 · PMID 35292870doi:10.1186/s40634-022-00461-3

  16. One in 5 athletes sustain reinjury upon return to high-risk sports after ACL reconstruction: a systematic review in 1239 athletes younger than 20 years

    Barber-Westin S, Noyes FR

    2020Sports Health 12(6):587–597 · PMID 32374646doi:10.1177/1941738120912846

  17. Sex-specific outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Mok AC, Fancher AJ, Vopat ML, Baker J, Tarakemeh A, Mullen S, Schroeppel JP, Templeton K, Mulcahey MK, Vopat BG

    2022Orthop J Sports Med 10(2):23259671221076883 · PMID 35224122doi:10.1177/23259671221076883

  18. Factors associated with revision following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review of registry data

    Rahardja R, Zhu M, Love H, Clatworthy MG, Monk AP, Young SW

    2020Knee 27(2):287–299 · PMID 32014408doi:10.1016/j.knee.2019.12.003

  19. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG

    2009PLoS Med 6(7):e1000097 · PMID 19621072doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

  20. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration

    Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D

    2009PLoS Med 6(7):e1000100 · PMID 19621070doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100

  21. Introduction to meta-analysis

    Borenstein M, Hedges L, Higgins J, Hannah R

    2009

  22. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

    Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG

    2003BMJ 327(7414):557–560 · PMID 12958120doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557

  23. Meniscal injuries: a critical review

    Lento PH, Akuthota V

    2000J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 15(2):55–62 · PMID 22388443doi:10.3233/BMR-2000-152-302

  24. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. http://handbook.cochrane.org/chapter_16/16_5_4_how_to_include_multiple_groups_from_one_study.htm

    Authors not recorded

  25. Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors

    Hayden JA, van der Windt DA, Cartwright JL, Côté P, Bombardier C

    2013Ann Intern Med 158(4):280–286 · PMID 23420236doi:10.7326/0003-4819-158-4-201302190-00009

  26. Elaborating on the assessment of the risk of bias in prognostic studies in pain rehabilitation using QUIPS-aspects of interrater agreement

    Grooten WJA, Tseli E, Äng BO, Boersma K, Stålnacke BM, Gerdle B, Enthoven P

    2019Diagn Progn Res 3:5 · PMID 31093575doi:10.1186/s41512-019-0050-0

  27. A nonparametric "trim and fill method" of accounting for publication bias in meta-analyses

    Duval S, Tweedy R

    2000J Am Stat Assoc 95:89–98

  28. The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: a large survey

    Ioannidis JP, Trikalinos TA

    2007CMAJ 176(8):1091–1096 · PMID 17420491doi:10.1503/cmaj.060410

  29. How to GRADE the quality of evidence. Cochrane Consumers and Evaluation Group. https://opal.latrobe.edu.au/articles/journal_contribution/How_to_GRADE/6818894

    Authors not recorded

  30. Judging the quality of evidence in reviews of prognostic factor research: adapting the GRADE framework

    Huguet A, Hayden JA, Stinson J, McGrath PJ, Chambers CT, Tougas ME, Wozney L

    2013Syst Rev 2:71 · PMID 24007720doi:10.1186/2046-4053-2-71

  31. Biomechanical measures during landing and postural stability predict second anterior cruciate ligament injury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and return to sport

    Paterno MV, Schmitt LC, Ford KR, Rauh MJ, Myer GD, Huang B, Hewett TE

    2010Am J Sports Med 38(10):1968–1978 · PMID 20702858doi:10.1177/0363546510376053

  32. Allograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the young, active patient: Tegner activity level and failure rate

    Barrett GR, Luber K, Replogle WH, Manley JL

    2010Arthroscopy 26(12):1593–1601 · PMID 20952145doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2010.05.014

  33. Clinical comparison of the Tutoplast allograft and autologous patellar tendon (bone-patellar tendon-bone) for the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament: 2- and 6-year results

    Gorschewsky O, Klakow A, Riechert K, Pitzl M, Becker R

    2005Am J Sports Med 33(8):1202–1209 · PMID 16000670doi:10.1177/0363546504271510

  34. Arthroscopic reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament using bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft: a minimum 10-year follow-up

    Lebel B, Hulet C, Galaud B, Burdin G, Locker B, Vielpeau C

    2008Am J Sports Med 36(7):1275–1282 · PMID 18354147doi:10.1177/0363546508314721

  35. Additional surgery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: can we improve technical aspects of the initial procedure?

    van Dijck RA, Saris DB, Willems JW, Fievez AW

    2008Arthroscopy 24(1):88–95 · PMID 18182208doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2007.08.012

  36. The effect of initial graft tension after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a randomized clinical trial with 36-month follow-up

    Fleming BC, Fadale PD, Hulstyn MJ, Shalvoy RM, Oksendahl HL, Badger GJ, Tung GA

    2013Am J Sports Med 41(1):25–34 · PMID 23144370doi:10.1177/0363546512464200

  37. Simple decision rules can reduce reinjury risk by 84% after ACL reconstruction: the Delaware-Oslo ACL cohort study

    Grindem H, Snyder-Mackler L, Moksnes H, Engebretsen L, Risberg MA

    2016Br J Sports Med 50(13):804–808 · PMID 27162233doi:10.1136/bjsports-2016-096031

  38. Activity and functional readiness, not age, are the critical factors for second anterior cruciate ligament injury—the Delaware-Oslo ACL cohort study

    Grindem H, Engebretsen L, Axe M, Snyder-Mackler L, Risberg MA

    2020Br J Sports Med 54:1099–1102 · PMID 32046955doi:10.1136/bjsports-2019-100623

  39. Greater fear of re-injury and increased tibial translation in patients who later sustain an ACL graft rupture or a contralateral ACL rupture: a pilot study

    Tagesson S, Kvist J

    2016J Sports Sci 34(2):125–132 · PMID 25894209doi:10.1080/02640414.2015.1035668

  40. Gait mechanics and second ACL rupture: implications for delaying return-to-sport

    Capin JJ, Khandha A, Zarzycki R, Manal K, Buchanan TS, Snyder-Mackler L

    2016J Orthop Res 35:1894–1901 · PMID 27859527doi:10.1002/jor.23476

  41. Young athletes who return to sport before 9 months after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction have a rate of new injury 7 times that of those who delay return

    Beischer S, Gustavsson L, Senorski EH, Karlsson J, Thomeé C, Samuelsson K, Thomeé R

    2020J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 50(2):83–90 · PMID 32005095doi:10.2519/jospt.2020.9071

  42. Return to sport after pediatric anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and its effect on subsequent anterior cruciate ligament injury

    Dekker TJ, Godin JA, Dale KM, Garrett WE, Taylor DC, Riboh JC

    2017J Bone Jt Surg Am 99(11):897–904 · PMID 28590374doi:10.2106/JBJS.16.00758

  43. The vertical drop jump is a poor screening test for ACL injuries in female elite soccer and handball players: a prospective cohort study of 710 athletes

    Krosshaug T, Steffen K, Kristianslund E, Nilstad A, Mok KM, Myklebust G, Andersen TE, Holme I, Engebretsen L, Bahr R

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(4):874–883 · PMID 26867936doi:10.1177/0363546515625048

  44. Anterior cruciate ligament injury, return to play, and reinjury in the elite collegiate athlete: analysis of an NCAA division I cohort

    Kamath GV, Murphy T, Creighton RA, Viradia N, Taft TN, Spang JT

    2014Am J Sports Med 42(7):1638–1643 · PMID 24981340doi:10.1177/0363546514524164

  45. Incidence of second anterior cruciate ligament tears and identification of associated risk factors from 2001 to 2010 using a geographic database

    Schilaty ND, Nagelli C, Bates NA, Sanders TL, Krych AJ, Stuart MJ, Hewett TE

    2017Orthop J Sports Med 5(8):2325967117724196 · PMID 28840155doi:10.1177/2325967117724196

  46. Delaying ACL reconstruction and treating with exercise therapy alone may alter prognostic factors for 5-year outcome: an exploratory analysis of the KANON trial

    Filbay SR, Roos EM, Frobell RB, Roemer F, Ranstam J, Lohmander LS

    2017Br J Sports Med 51(22):1622–1629 · PMID 28515057doi:10.1136/bjsports-2016-097124

  47. Outside-in vs. anteromedial portal drilling during primary ACL reconstruction: comparison at two years

    CarlLee T, Ries Z, Duchman K, Gao Y, Wolf B, Amendola A, Hettrich C, Bollier M

    2017Iowa Orthop J 37:117–122 · PMID 28852345

  48. Psychological readiness to return to sport is associated with second anterior cruciate ligament injuries

    McPherson AL, Feller JA, Hewett TE, Webster KE

    2019Am J Sports Med 47(4):857–862 · PMID 30753794doi:10.1177/0363546518825258

  49. No clinical difference in 10-year outcomes between standard and minimal graft debridement techniques in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autologous hamstrings: a randomized controlled trial

    Annear PT, Rohr EJ, Hille DM, Gohil S, Ebert JR

    2019Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27(2):516–523 · PMID 30238238doi:10.1007/s00167-018-5146-5

  50. Clinical factors that predict a second ACL injury after ACL reconstruction and return to sport: preliminary development of a clinical decision algorithm

    Paterno MV, Huang B, Thomas S, Hewett TE, Schmitt LC

    2017Orthop J Sports Med 5(12):2325967117745279 · PMID 29318172doi:10.1177/2325967117745279

  51. Return to play and future ACL injury risk after ACL reconstruction in soccer athletes from the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) group

    Brophy RH, Schmitz L, Wright RW, Dunn WR, Parker RD, Andrish JT, McCarty EC, Spindler KP

    2012Am J Sports Med 40(11):2517–2522 · PMID 23002201doi:10.1177/0363546512459476

  52. Prospectively identified deficits in sagittal plane hip-ankle coordination in female athletes who sustain a second anterior cruciate ligament injury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and return to sport

    Paterno MV, Kiefer AW, Bonnette S, Riley MA, Schmitt LC, Ford KR, Myer GD, Shockley K, Hewett TE

    2015Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 30(10):1094–1101 · PMID 26416200doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.08.019

  53. Incidence of second ACL injuries 2 years after primary ACL reconstruction and return to sport

    Paterno MV, Rauh MJ, Schmitt LC, Ford KR, Hewett TE

    2014Am J Sports Med 42(7):1567–1573 · PMID 24753238doi:10.1177/0363546514530088

  54. Improved results of ACL primary repair in one-part tears with intact synovial coverage

    Ateschrang A, Schreiner AJ, Ahmad SS, Schröter S, Hirschmann MT, Körner D, Kohl S, Stöckle U, Ahrend MD

    2019Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27(1):37–43 · PMID 30298414doi:10.1007/s00167-018-5199-5

  55. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft: a matched cohort comparison of the all-inside and complete tibial tunnel techniques

    Desai VS, Anderson GR, Wu IT, Levy BA, Dahm DL, Camp CL, Krych AJ, Stuart MJ

    2019Orthop J Sports Med 7(1):2325967118820297 · PMID 30671490doi:10.1177/2325967118820297

  56. Combined reconstruction of the anterolateral ligament in chronic ACL injuries leads to better clinical outcomes than isolated ACL reconstruction

    Helito CP, Camargo DB, Sobrado MF, Bonadio MB, Giglio PN, Pécora JR, Camanho GL, Demange MK

    2018Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(12):3652–3659 · PMID 29610972doi:10.1007/s00167-018-4934-2

  57. Acute anterior cruciate ligament rupture: repair or reconstruction? Two-year results of a randomized controlled clinical trial

    Hoogeslag RAG, Brouwer RW, Boer BC, de Vries AJ, Huis In ‘t Veld R

    2019Am J Sports Med 47(3):567–577 · PMID 30822124doi:10.1177/0363546519825878

  58. Long-term follow-up of ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft

    Leiter JR, Gourlay R, McRae S, de Korompay N, MacDonald PB

    2014Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(5):1061–1069 · PMID 23595537doi:10.1007/s00167-013-2466-3

  59. Clinical outcomes of single anteromedial bundle biologic augmentation technique for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with consideration of tibial remnant size

    Ouanezar H, Blakeney WG, Fernandes LR, Borade A, Latrobe C, Temponi EF, Sonnery-Cottet B

    2018Arthroscopy 34(3):714–722 · PMID 29198590doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2017.08.309

  60. Factors that predict failure in anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Parkinson B, Robb C, Thomas M, Thompson P, Spalding T

    2017Am J Sports Med 45(7):1529–1536 · PMID 28296429doi:10.1177/0363546517691961

  61. Increased risk of revision after anteromedial compared with transtibial drilling of the femoral tunnel during primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from the Danish Knee Ligament Reconstruction Register

    Rahr-Wagner L, Thillemann TM, Pedersen AB, Lind MC

    2013Arthroscopy 29(1):98–105 · PMID 23276417doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2012.09.009

  62. Comparison of hamstring tendon and patellar tendon grafts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in a nationwide population-based cohort study: results from the Danish Registry of knee ligament reconstruction

    Rahr-Wagner L, Thillemann TM, Pedersen AB, Lind M

    2014Am J Sports Med 42(2):278–284 · PMID 24275859doi:10.1177/0363546513509220

  63. A prospective randomized comparison of two distinct allogenic tissue constructs for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Rose MB, Domes C, Farooqi M, Crawford DC

    2016Knee 23(6):1112–1120 · PMID 27876265doi:10.1016/j.knee.2016.08.011

  64. Anatomical "C"-shaped double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in pre-adolescent children with open growth plates

    Siebold R, Takada T, Feil S, Dietrich C, Stinton SK, Branch TP

    2016Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(3):796–806 · PMID 26860289doi:10.1007/s00167-016-4039-8

  65. Double-bundle versus single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective randomized study with 5-year results

    Suomalainen P, Järvelä T, Paakkala A, Kannus P, Järvinen M

    2012Am J Sports Med 40(7):1511–1518 · PMID 22691456doi:10.1177/0363546512448177

  66. Transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in patients with open physes: 10-year follow-up study

    Calvo R, Figueroa D, Gili F, Vaisman A, Mocoçain P, Espinosa M, León A, Arellano S

    2015Am J Sports Med 43(2):289–294 · PMID 25404615doi:10.1177/0363546514557939

  67. Failure rate and clinical outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using autograft hamstring versus a hybrid graft

    Leo BM, Krill M, Barksdale L, Alvarez-Pinzon AM

    2016Arthroscopy 32(11):2357–2363 · PMID 27286700doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2016.04.016

  68. Higher frequency of osteoarthritis in patients with ACL graft rupture than in those with intact ACL grafts 30 years after reconstruction

    Söderman T, Wretling ML, Hänni M, Mikkelsen C, Johnson RJ, Werner S, Sundin A, Shalabi A

    2020Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(7):2139–2146 · PMID 31664487doi:10.1007/s00167-019-05726-6

  69. Collagen application reduces complication rates of mid-substance ACL tears treated with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization

    Evangelopoulos DS, Kohl S, Schwienbacher S, Gantenbein B, Exadaktylos A, Ahmad SS

    2017Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(8):2414–2419 · PMID 26564213doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3838-7

  70. Outcomes of physeal-sparing ACL reconstruction with iliotibial band autograft in skeletally immature prepubescent children

    Kocher MS, Heyworth BE, Fabricant PD, Tepolt FA, Micheli LJ

    2018J Bone Jt Surg Am 100(13):1087–1094 · PMID 29975275doi:10.2106/JBJS.17.01327

  71. Comparison of knee stability and synovial fluid alterations in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a hamstring autograft or an allograft

    Yang R, Deng H, Hou J, Ouyang Y, Chen Z, Song B, Zhou Y, Tan W, Li W, Shen H

    2017Orthopedics 40(5):e892–e897 · PMID 28877329doi:10.3928/01477447-20170824-02

  72. Predictors for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) re-injury after successful primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR)

    Gupta R, Singhal A, Malhotra A, Soni A, Masih GD, Raghav M

    2020Malays Orthop J 14(3):50–56 · PMID 33403062doi:10.5704/MOJ.2011.009

  73. Incidence of contralateral and ipsilateral anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury after primary ACL reconstruction and return to sport

    Paterno MV, Rauh MJ, Schmitt LC, Ford KR, Hewett TE

    2012Clin J Sport Med 22(2):116–121 · PMID 22343967doi:10.1097/JSM.0b013e318246ef9e

  74. The rate of subsequent surgery and predictors after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: two- and 6-year follow-up results from a multicenter cohort

    Hettrich CM, Dunn WR, Reinke EK, Spindler KP

    2013Am J Sports Med 41(7):1534–1540 · PMID 23722056doi:10.1177/0363546513490277

  75. A 10-year retrospective review of functional outcomes of adolescent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Reid D, Leigh W, Wilkins S, Willis R, Twaddle B, Walsh S

    2017J Pediatr Orthop 37(2):133–137 · PMID 26165552doi:10.1097/BPO.0000000000000594

  76. Gaj E, Monaco E, De Carli A, Wolf MR, Massafra C, Redler A, Mazza D, Ferretti A. Measurement technique for posterior tibial slope on radiographs can affect its relationship to the risk of anterior cruciate ligament rupture. Int Orthop. 2020.10.1007/s00264-020-04865-733146767

    Authors not recorded

    · PMID 33146767doi:10.1007/s00264-020-04865-7

  77. Patient-reported outcomes, return-to-sport status, and reinjury rates after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in adolescent athletes: minimum 2-year follow-up

    Fones L, Kostyun RO, Cohen AD, Pace JL

    2020Orthop J Sports Med 8(11):2325967120964471 · PMID 33283005doi:10.1177/2325967120964471

  78. Australian footballers returning from anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction later than 12 months have worse outcomes

    Chaker Jomaa M, Gultekin S, Orchard J, Driscoll T, Orchard J

    2020Indian J Orthop 54(3):317–323 · PMID 32399151doi:10.1007/s43465-020-00092-9

  79. Poor validity of functional performance tests to predict knee injury in female soccer players with or without anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Fältström A, Hägglund M, Hedevik H, Kvist J

    2021Am J Sports Med 49(6):1441–1450 · PMID 33844590doi:10.1177/03635465211002541

  80. Age, rehabilitation and surgery characteristics are re-injury risk factors for adolescents following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Law MA, Ko YA, Miller AL, Lauterbach KN, Hendley CL, Johnson JE, Tsai LC

    2021Phys Ther Sport 49:196–203 · PMID 33765648doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.03.003

  81. Femoral tunnel length has no correlation with graft rupture: a retrospective cohort study

    Gupta R, Singhal A, Kapoor A, Mehta R, Masih GD

    2021Knee 29:405–410 · PMID 33714927doi:10.1016/j.knee.2021.02.023

  82. Predictors for additional anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: data from the Swedish National ACL Register

    Fältstrom A, Hagglund M, Magnusson H, Forssblad M, Kvist J

    2016Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(3):885–894 · PMID 25366191doi:10.1007/s00167-014-3406-6

  83. The Swedish National Anterior Cruciate Ligament Register: a report on baseline variables and outcomes of surgery for almost 18,000 patients

    Ahlden M, Samuelsson K, Sernert N, Forssblad M, Karlsson J, Kartus J

    2012Am J Sports Med 40(10):2230–2235 · PMID 22962296doi:10.1177/0363546512457348

  84. Surgical predictors of early revision surgery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: results from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Register on 13,102 patients

    Andernord D, Björnsson H, Petzold M, Eriksson BI, Forssblad M, Karlsson J, Samuelsson K

    2014Am J Sports Med 42(7):1574–1582 · PMID 24778266doi:10.1177/0363546514531396

  85. Patient predictors of early revision surgery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cohort study of 16,930 patients with 2-year follow-up

    Andernord D, Desai N, Bjornsson H, Ylander M, Karlsson J, Samuelsson K

    2015Am J Sports Med 43(1):121–127 · PMID 25325560doi:10.1177/0363546514552788

  86. Increased risk of revision with hamstring tendon grafts compared with patellar tendon grafts after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a study of 12,643 patients from the Norwegian Cruciate Ligament Registry, 2004–2012

    Persson A, Fjeldsgaard K, Gjertsen JE, Kjellsen AB, Engebretsen L, Hole RM, Fevang JM

    2014Am J Sports Med 42(2):285–291 · PMID 24322979doi:10.1177/0363546513511419

  87. Risk for revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is higher among adolescents: results from the Danish Registry of knee ligament reconstruction

    Faunø P, Rahr-Wagner L, Lind M

    2014Orthop J Sports Med 2(10):2325967114552405 · PMID 26535272doi:10.1177/2325967114552405

  88. Lower risk of revision with patellar tendon autografts compared with hamstring autografts: a registry study based on 45,998 primary ACL reconstructions in Scandinavia

    Gifstad T, Foss OA, Engebretsen L, Lind M, Forssblad M, Albrektsen G, Drogset JO

    2014Am J Sports Med 42(10):2319–2328 · PMID 25201444doi:10.1177/0363546514548164

  89. Young age and high BMI are predictors of early revision surgery after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cohort study from the Swedish and Norwegian Knee Ligament Registries based on 30,747 patients

    Snaebjornsson T, Svantesson E, Sundemo D, Westin O, Sansone M, Engebretsen L, Hamrin-Senorski E

    2019Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27(11):3583–3591 · PMID 30879108doi:10.1007/s00167-019-05487-2

  90. Increased risk of ACL revision with non-surgical treatment of a concomitant medial collateral ligament injury: a study on 19,457 patients from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry

    Svantesson E, Hamrin Senorski E, Alentorn-Geli E, Westin O, Sundemo D, Grassi A, Čustović S, Samuelsson K

    2019Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27(8):2450–2459 · PMID 30374568doi:10.1007/s00167-018-5237-3

  91. Associations between inadequate knee function detected by KOOS and prospective graft failure in an anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee

    Granan LP, Baste V, Engebretsen L, Inacio MC

    2015Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(4):1135–1140 · PMID 24619491doi:10.1007/s00167-014-2925-5

  92. High risk of further anterior cruciate ligament injury in a 10-year follow-up study of anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed soccer players in the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry

    Sandon A, Engström B, Forssblad M

    2020Arthroscopy 36(1):189–195 · PMID 31439457doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2019.05.052

  93. The first results from the Danish ACL Reconstruction Registry: epidemiologic and 2 year follow-up results from 5,818 knee ligament reconstructions

    Lind M, Menhert F, Pedersen AB

    2009Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 17(2):117–124 · PMID 18974970doi:10.1007/s00167-008-0654-3

  94. Contralateral and siblings' knees are at higher risk of ACL tear for patients with a positive history of ACL tear

    Mardani-Kivi M, Mobarakeh MK, Keyhani S, Ebrahim-Zadeh MH, Azari Z

    2019Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28:622–628 · PMID 31724093doi:10.1007/s00167-019-05781-z

  95. Return to sport activity after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a 6–10 years follow-up

    Mardani-Kivi M, Azari Z, Hasannejad F

    2020J Clin Orthop Trauma 11(Suppl 3):S319–s325 · PMID 32523287doi:10.1016/j.jcot.2019.09.023

  96. Fifteen-year outcome of endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon autograft for "isolated" anterior cruciate ligament tear

    Hui C, Salmon LJ, Kok A, Maeno S, Linklater J, Pinczewski LA

    2011Am J Sports Med 39(1):89–98 · PMID 20962336doi:10.1177/0363546510379975

  97. Twenty-year outcomes of a longitudinal prospective evaluation of isolated endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon autografts

    Thompson S, Salmon L, Waller A, Linklater J, Roe J, Pinczewski L

    2015Am J Sports Med 43(9):2164–2174 · PMID 26187130doi:10.1177/0363546515591263

  98. Twenty-year outcome of a longitudinal prospective evaluation of isolated endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon or hamstring autograft

    Thompson SM, Salmon LJ, Waller A, Linklater J, Roe JP, Pinczewski LA

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(12):3083–3094 · PMID 27492972doi:10.1177/0363546516658041

  99. Allograft versus autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: predictors of failure from a MOON prospective longitudinal cohort

    Kaeding CC, Aros B, Pedroza A, Pifel E, Amendola A, Andrish JT, Dunn WR, Marx RG, McCarty EC, Parker RD, et al.

    2011Sports Health 3(1):73–81 · PMID 23015994doi:10.1177/1941738110386185

  100. Risk factors and predictors of subsequent ACL injury in either knee after ACL reconstruction: prospective analysis of 2488 primary ACL reconstructions from the MOON cohort

    Kaeding CC, Pedroza AD, Reinke EK, Huston LJ, Spindler KP

    2015Am J Sports Med 43(7):1583–1590 · PMID 25899429doi:10.1177/0363546515578836

  101. Change in anterior cruciate ligament graft choice and outcomes over time

    Kaeding CC, Pedroza AD, Reinke EK, Huston LJ, Hewett TE, Flanigan DC, Spindler KP

    2017Arthroscopy 33(11):2007–2014 · PMID 28847572doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2017.06.019

  102. The influence of hamstring autograft size on patient-reported outcomes and risk of revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) cohort study

    Mariscalco MW, Flanigan DC, Mitchell J, Pedroza AD, Jones MH, Andrish JT, Parker RD, Kaeding CC, Magnussen RA

    2013Arthroscopy 29(12):1948–1953 · PMID 24140144doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2013.08.025

  103. Activity level and graft type as risk factors for anterior cruciate ligament graft failure: a case–control study

    Borchers JR, Pedroza A, Kaeding C

    2009Am J Sports Med 37(12):2362–2367 · PMID 19684294doi:10.1177/0363546509340633

  104. Younger patients are at increased risk for graft rupture and contralateral injury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Webster KE, Feller JA, Leigh WB, Richmond AK

    2014Am J Sports Med 42(3):641–647 · PMID 24451111doi:10.1177/0363546513517540

  105. Exploring the high reinjury rate in younger patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Webster KE, Feller JA

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(11):2827–2832 · PMID 27390346doi:10.1177/0363546516651845

  106. Risk factors associated with revision and contralateral anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions in the Kaiser Permanente ACLR Registry

    Maletis GB, Inacio MC, Funahashi TT

    2015Am J Sports Med 43(3):641–647 · PMID 25548148doi:10.1177/0363546514561745

  107. Age-related risk factors for revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cohort study of 21,304 patients from the Kaiser Permanente Anterior Cruciate Ligament Registry

    Maletis GB, Chen J, Inacio MC, Funahashi TT

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(2):331–336 · PMID 26637284doi:10.1177/0363546515614813

  108. Analysis of 16,192 anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions from a community-based registry

    Maletis GB, Inacio MC, Funahashi TT

    2013Am J Sports Med 41(9):2090–2098 · PMID 23813802doi:10.1177/0363546513493589

  109. Generalised ligamentous laxity and revision ACL surgery: is there a relation?

    Akhtar MA, Bhattacharya R, Keating JF

    2016Knee 23(6):1148–1153 · PMID 27856128doi:10.1016/j.knee.2015.11.006

  110. Partial meniscectomy adversely affects return-to-sport outcome after anatomical double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Akada T, Yamaura I, Gupta A, Sakai H, Takahashi K, Tsuchiya A

    2019Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27(3):912–920 · PMID 30413858doi:10.1007/s00167-018-5213-y

  111. Are female soccer players at an increased risk of second anterior cruciate ligament injury compared with their athletic peers?

    Allen MM, Pareek A, Krych AJ, Hewett TE, Levy BA, Stuart MJ, Dahm DL

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(10):2492–2498 · PMID 27261476doi:10.1177/0363546516648439

  112. Anterior cruciate ligament graft failure: a comparison of graft type based on age and Tegner activity level

    Barrett AM, Craft JA, Replogle WH, Hydrick JM, Barrett GR

    2011Am J Sports Med 39(10):2194–2198 · PMID 21784999doi:10.1177/0363546511415655

  113. The degree of knee extension does not affect postoperative stability or subsequent graft tear rate after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon autograft

    Benner RW, Shelbourne KD, Gray T

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(4):844–849 · PMID 26801922doi:10.1177/0363546515623507

  114. Survival of the anterior cruciate ligament graft and the contralateral ACL at a minimum of 15 years

    Bourke HE, Salmon LJ, Waller A, Patterson V, Pinczewski LA

    2012Am J Sports Med 40(9):1985–1992 · PMID 22869626doi:10.1177/0363546512454414

  115. Lateral tibial posterior slope is increased in patients with early graft failure after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Christensen JJ, Krych AJ, Engasser WM, Vanhees MK, Collins MS, Dahm DL

    2015Am J Sports Med 43(10):2510–2514 · PMID 26320223doi:10.1177/0363546515597664

  116. Physiologic preoperative knee hyperextension is a predictor of failure in an anterior cruciate ligament revision cohort: a report from the MARS Group

    Cooper DE, Dunn WR, Huston LJ, Haas AK, Spindler KP, Allen CR, Anderson AF, DeBerardino TM, Lantz BBA, Mann B, et al.

    2018Am J Sports Med 46(12):2836–2841 · PMID 29882693doi:10.1177/0363546518777732

  117. Examination of knee morphology after secondary ipsilateral ACL injury compared with those that have not been reinjured: a preliminary study

    Digiacomo JE, Palmieri-Smith RM, Redman JA, Lepley LK

    2018J Sport Rehabil 27(1):73–82 · PMID 28095169doi:10.1123/jsr.2016-0093

  118. Cartilage damage at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is associated with weaker quadriceps function and lower risk of future ACL injury

    Everhart JS, DiBartola AC, Swank K, Pettit R, Hughes L, Lewis C, Flanigan DC

    2020Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(2):576–583 · PMID 31598765doi:10.1007/s00167-019-05739-1

  119. Familial predisposition to anterior cruciate ligament injury

    Goshima K, Kitaoka K, Nakase J, Tsuchiya H

    2014Asia-Pac J Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Technol 1(2):62–66

  120. More than a 2-fold risk of contralateral anterior cruciate ligament injuries compared with ipsilateral graft failure 10 years after primary reconstruction

    Grassi A, Macchiarola L, Lucidi GA, Stefanelli F, Neri M, Silvestri A, Della Villa F, Zaffagnini S

    2020Am J Sports Med. 48(2):310–317 · PMID 31910045doi:10.1177/0363546519893711

  121. Patients with failed anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction have an increased posterior lateral Tibial Plateau slope: a case–controlled study

    Grassi A, Signorelli C, Urrizola F, Macchiarola L, Raggi F, Mosca M, Samuelsson K, Zaffagnini S

    2019Arthroscopy 35(4):1172–1182 · PMID 30878331doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2018.11.049

  122. Patient and surgical characteristics that affect revision risk in dynamic intraligamentary stabilization of the anterior cruciate ligament

    Henle P, Bieri KS, Brand M, Aghayev E, Bettfuehr J, Haeberli J, Kess M, Eggli S

    2018Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(4):1182–1189 · PMID 28523340doi:10.1007/s00167-017-4574-y

  123. Surgeon experience with dynamic intraligamentary stabilization does not influence risk of failure

    Henle P, Bieri KS, Haeberli J, Arnout N, Victor J, Herbort M, Koesters C, Eggli S

    2018Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(10):2978–2985 · PMID 29404653doi:10.1007/s00167-018-4847-0

  124. Tear rates of the ipsilateral ACL graft and the contralateral native ACL are similar following ACL reconstruction

    Ifran NN, Mok YR, Krishna L

    2022J Knee Surg. 35(3):308–311 · PMID 32659816doi:10.1055/s-0040-1713861

  125. Influence of the tibial slope on recurrent ACL ruptures

    Kajetanek C, Rousseau R, Makridis K, Sanchez M, Dehlin C, Djian P

    2017Journal de Traumatologie du Sport 34(1):37–43doi:10.1016/j.jts.2016.10.002

  126. Age, graft size, and Tegner activity level as predictors of failure in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft

    Kamien PM, Hydrick JM, Replogle WH, Go LT, Barrett GR

    2013Am J Sports Med 41(8):1808–1812 · PMID 23813800doi:10.1177/0363546513493896

  127. Predictive factors for failure of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction via the trans-tibial technique

    Kim SH, Park YB, Kim DH, Pujol N, Lee HJ

    2020Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 140(10):1445–1457 · PMID 32529386doi:10.1007/s00402-020-03483-7

  128. Factors influencing return to play and second anterior cruciate ligament injury rates in level 1 athletes after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: 2-year follow-up on 1432 reconstructions at a single center

    King E, Richter C, Jackson M, Franklyn-Miller A, Falvey E, Myer GD, Strike S, Withers D, Moran R

    2020Am J Sports Med 48(4):812–824 · PMID 32031870doi:10.1177/0363546519900170

  129. Factors influencing the success of anterior cruciate ligament repair with dynamic intraligamentary stabilisation

    Krismer AM, Gousopoulos L, Kohl S, Ateschrang A, Kohlhof H, Ahmad SS

    2017Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(12):3923–3928 · PMID 28210790doi:10.1007/s00167-017-4445-6

  130. Likelihood of ACL graft rupture: not meeting six clinical discharge criteria before return to sport is associated with a four times greater risk of rupture

    Kyritsis P, Bahr R, Landreau P, Miladi R, Witvrouw E

    2016Br J Sports Med 50(15):946–951 · PMID 27215935doi:10.1136/bjsports-2015-095908

  131. Analysis of return to competition and repeat rupture for 298 anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions with patellar or hamstring tendon autograft in sportspeople

    Laboute E, Savalli L, Puig P, Trouve P, Sabot G, Monnier G, Dubroca B

    2010Ann Phys Rehabil Med 53(10):598–614 · PMID 21112824doi:10.1016/j.rehab.2010.10.002

  132. Generalized hypermobility, knee hyperextension, and outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: prospective, case–control study with mean 6 years follow-up

    Larson CM, Bedi A, Dietrich ME, Swaringen JC, Wulf CA, Rowley DM, Giveans MR

    2017Arthroscopy 33(10):1852–1858 · PMID 28599980doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2017.04.012

  133. Clinical results and risk factors for reinjury 15 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective study of hamstring and patellar tendon grafts

    Leys T, Salmon L, Waller A, Linklater J, Pinczewski L

    2012Am J Sports Med 40(3):595–605 · PMID 22184280doi:10.1177/0363546511430375

  134. One sixth of primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions may undergo reoperation due to complications or new injuries within 2 years

    Lord L, Cristiani R, Edman G, Forssblad M, Stålman A

    2020Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(8):2478–2485 · PMID 32602035doi:10.1007/s00167-020-06127-w

  135. Graft size and patient age are predictors of early revision after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring autograft

    Magnussen RA, Lawrence JT, West RL, Toth AP, Taylor DC, Garrett WE

    2012Arthroscopy 28(4):526–531 · PMID 22305299doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2011.11.024

  136. Reruptures, reinjuries, and revisions at a minimum 2-year follow-up: a randomized clinical trial comparing 3 graft types for ACL reconstruction

    Mohtadi N, Chan D, Barber R, Paolucci EO

    2016Clin J Sport Med 26(2):96–107 · PMID 26164058doi:10.1097/JSM.0000000000000209

  137. Length of time between anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and return to sport does not predict need for revision surgery in National Football League players

    Okoroha KR, Fidai MS, Tramer JS, Elmenini J, Makhni EC, Verma NN, Bach BR, Moutzouros V

    2019Arthroscopy 35(1):158–162 · PMID 30611344doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2018.08.007

  138. An increased lateral femoral condyle ratio is a risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament injury

    Pfeiffer TR, Burnham JM, Hughes JD, Kanakamedala AC, Herbst E, Popchak A, Shafizadeh S, Irrgang JJ, Debski RE, Musahl V

    2018J Bone Jt Surg Am 100(10):857–864 · PMID 29762281doi:10.2106/JBJS.17.01011

  139. Reduced 2-D frontal plane motion during single-limb landing is associated with risk of future anterior cruciate ligament graft rupture after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and return to sport: a pilot study

    Poston GR, Schmitt LC, Ithurburn MP, Hugentobler JA, Thomas S, Paterno MV

    2021J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 51(2):82–87 · PMID 33356796doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.9302

  140. Rates of revision and surgeon-reported graft rupture following ACL reconstruction: early results from the New Zealand ACL Registry

    Rahardja R, Zhu M, Love H, Clatworthy MG, Monk AP, Young SW

    2020Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(7):2194–2202 · PMID 31679071doi:10.1007/s00167-019-05773-z

  141. Thirty-year experience with ACL reconstruction using patellar tendon: a critical evaluation of revision and reoperation

    Riff AJ, Luchetti TJ, Weber AE, Chahal J, Bach BR

    2017Orthop J Sports Med 5(8):2325967117724345 · PMID 28890904doi:10.1177/2325967117724345

  142. Combined anterior cruciate and anterolateral ligament reconstruction in the professional athlete: clinical outcomes from the Scientific Anterior Cruciate Ligament Network International Study Group in a series of 70 patients with a minimum follow-up of 2 years

    Rosenstiel N, Praz C, Ouanezar H, Saithna A, Fournier Y, Hager JP, Thaunat M, Sonnery-Cottet B

    2019Arthroscopy 35(3):885–892 · PMID 30704884doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2018.09.020

  143. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions with quadriceps tendon autograft result in lower graft rupture rates but similar patient-reported outcomes as compared with hamstring tendon autograft: a comparison of 875 patients

    Runer A, Csapo R, Hepperger C, Herbort M, Hoser C, Fink C

    2020Am J Sports Med 48(9):2195–2204 · PMID 32667271doi:10.1177/0363546520931829

  144. 20-year outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with hamstring tendon autograft: the catastrophic effect of age and posterior tibial slope

    Salmon LJ, Heath E, Akrawi H, Roe JP, Linklater J, Pinczewski LA

    2018Am J Sports Med 46(3):531–543 · PMID 29244525doi:10.1177/0363546517741497

  145. Incidence and risk factors for graft rupture and contralateral rupture after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Salmon L, Russell V, Musgrove T, Pinczewski L, Refshauge K

    2005Arthroscopy 21(8):948–957 · PMID 16084292doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2005.04.110

  146. Long-term outcome of endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon autograft: minimum 13-year review

    Salmon LJ, Russell VJ, Refshauge K, Kader D, Connolly C, Linklater J, Pinczewski LA

    2006Am J Sports Med 34(5):721–732 · PMID 16399931doi:10.1177/0363546505282626

  147. Long-term rate of graft failure after ACL reconstruction: a geographic population cohort analysis

    Sanders TL, Pareek A, Hewett TE, Levy BA, Dahm DL, Stuart MJ, Krych AJ

    2017Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(1):222–228 · PMID 27522592doi:10.1007/s00167-016-4275-y

  148. The influence of tibial slope on anterior cruciate ligament graft failure risk is dependent on graft positioning

    Sauer S, English R, Clatworthy M

    2019J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 27(1):2309499019834674 · PMID 30852943doi:10.1177/2309499019834674

  149. Traumatic graft rupture after primary and revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: retrospective analysis of incidence and risk factors in 2915 cases

    Schlumberger M, Schuster P, Schulz M, Immendörfer M, Mayer P, Bartholomä J, Richter J

    2017Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(5):1535–1541 · PMID 26410092doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3699-0

  150. Incidence of subsequent injury to either knee within 5 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with patellar tendon autograft

    Shelbourne KD, Gray T, Haro M

    2009Am J Sports Med 37(2):246–251 · PMID 19109531doi:10.1177/0363546508325665

  151. Failure of primary anterior cruciate ligament surgery using anterior tibialis allograft

    Singhal MC, Gardiner JR, Johnson DL

    2007Arthroscopy 23(5):469–475 · PMID 17478276doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2006.12.010

  152. Return to sport: does excellent 6-month strength and function following ACL reconstruction predict midterm outcomes?

    Sousa PL, Krych AJ, Cates RA, Levy BA, Stuart MJ, Dahm DL

    2017Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(5):1356–1363 · PMID 26205480doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3697-2

  153. Medial tibial slope determined by plain radiography is not associated with primary or recurrent anterior cruciate ligament tears

    Su AW, Bogunovic L, Smith MV, Gortz S, Brophy RH, Wright RW, Matava MJ

    2020J Knee Surg 33(1):22–28 · PMID 30577053doi:10.1055/s-0038-1676456

  154. Prospective analysis of failure rate and predictors of failure after anatomic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with allograft

    van Eck CF, Schkrohowsky JG, Working ZM, Irrgang JJ, Fu FH

    2012Am J Sports Med 40(4):800–807 · PMID 22238055doi:10.1177/0363546511432545

  155. Risk factors for recurrent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a population study in Ontario, Canada, with 5-year follow-up

    Wasserstein D, Khoshbin A, Dwyer T, Chahal J, Gandhi R, Mahomed N, Ogilvie-Harris D

    2013Am J Sports Med 41(9):2099–2107 · PMID 23857886doi:10.1177/0363546513493580

  156. Posterior tibial slope and further anterior cruciate ligament injuries in the anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed patient

    Webb JM, Salmon LJ, Leclerc E, Pinczewski LA, Roe JP

    2013Am J Sports Med 41(12):2800–2804 · PMID 24036571doi:10.1177/0363546513503288

  157. Passing return to sports tests after ACL reconstruction is associated with greater likelihood for return to sport but fail to identify second injury risk

    Welling W, Benjaminse A, Lemmink K, Gokeler A

    2020Knee 27(3):949–957 · PMID 32247810doi:10.1016/j.knee.2020.03.007

  158. Clinical tests can be used to screen for second anterior cruciate ligament injury in younger patients who return to sport

    Webster KE, Feller JA

    2019Orthop J Sports Med 7(8):2325967119863003 · PMID 31431901doi:10.1177/2325967119863003

  159. Risk of tearing the intact anterior cruciate ligament in the contralateral knee and rupturing the anterior cruciate ligament graft during the first 2 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective MOON cohort study

    Wright RW, Dunn WR, Amendola A, Andrish JT, Bergfeld J, Kaeding CC, Marx RG, McCarty EC, Parker RD, Wolcott M, et al.

    2007Am J Sports Med 35(7):1131–1134 · PMID 17452511doi:10.1177/0363546507301318

  160. Predictors of revision surgery after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Yabroudi MA, Björnsson H, Lynch AD, Muller B, Samuelsson K, Tarabichi M, Karlsson J, Fu FH, Harner CD, Irrgang JJ

    2016Orthop J Sports Med 4(9):2325967116666039 · PMID 27734019doi:10.1177/2325967116666039

  161. Role of physiotherapy in preventing failure of primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Vincent YP-H, Yiu-Chung W, Patrick YS-H

    2017J Orthop Trauma Rehabil 22(1):6–12

  162. Mid-bundle positioning of the femoral socket increases graft rupture in anatomic single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Borton ZM, Yasen SK, Mumith A, Wilson AJ

    2018Knee 25(6):1122–1128 · PMID 30224151doi:10.1016/j.knee.2018.08.007

  163. Comparison of anterior cruciate ligament volume after anatomic double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Lee BH, Jangir R, Kim HY, Shin JM, Chang M, Kim K, Wang JH

    2017Knee 24(3):580–587 · PMID 28408164doi:10.1016/j.knee.2017.02.009

  164. Does posterior tibial slope affect graft rupture following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?

    Lee CC, Youm YS, Cho SD, Jung SH, Bae MH, Park SJ, Kim HW

    2018Arthroscopy 34(7):2152–2155 · PMID 29530354doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2018.01.058

  165. Predictors of revision surgery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Pullen WM, Bryant B, Gaskill T, Sicignano N, Evans AM, DeMaio M

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(12):3140–3145 · PMID 27519675doi:10.1177/0363546516660062

  166. The relationship between intercondylar notch width of the femur and the incidence of anterior cruciate ligament tears. A prospective study

    Shelbourne KD, Davis TJ, Klootwyk TE

    1998Am J Sports Med 26(3):402–408 · PMID 9617403doi:10.1177/03635465980260031001

  167. Primary ACL reconstruction using the LARS device is associated with a high failure rate at minimum of 6-year follow-up

    Tulloch SJ, Devitt BM, Porter T, Hartwig T, Klemm H, Hookway S, Norsworthy CJ

    2019Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27(11):3626–3632 · PMID 30903217doi:10.1007/s00167-019-05478-3

  168. The impact of transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction on lower extremity growth and alignment

    Bayomy AF, Bompadre V, Schmale GA

    2019Arthroscopy 35(3):940–949 · PMID 30733028doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2018.10.132

  169. Do pediatric patients with anterior cruciate ligament tears have a higher rate of familial anterior cruciate ligament injury?

    Bram JT, Pascual-Leone N, Patel NM, DeFrancesco CJ, Talathi NS, Ganley TJ

    2020Orthop J Sports Med 8(10):2325967120959665 · PMID 33195715doi:10.1177/2325967120959665

  170. The challenges of treating female soccer players with ACL injuries: hamstring versus bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft

    Britt E, Ouillette R, Edmonds E, Chambers H, Johnson K, Bastrom T, Pennock A

    2020Orthop J Sports Med 8(11):2325967120964884 · PMID 33294473doi:10.1177/2325967120964884

  171. All-epiphyseal ACL reconstruction in children: review of safety and early complications

    Cruz AI, Fabricant PD, McGraw M, Rozell JC, Ganley TJ, Wells L

    2017J Pediatr Orthop 37(3):204–209 · PMID 26192883doi:10.1097/BPO.0000000000000606

  172. Outcomes and revision rate after bone-patellar tendon-bone allograft versus autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in patients aged 18 years or younger with closed physes

    Ellis HB, Matheny LM, Briggs KK, Pennock AT, Steadman JR

    2012Arthroscopy 28(12):1819–1825 · PMID 23102671doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2012.06.016

  173. Comparison of allograft versus autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction graft survival in an active adolescent cohort

    Engelman GH, Carry PM, Hitt KG, Polousky JD, Vidal AF

    2014Am J Sports Med 42(10):2311–2318 · PMID 25081312doi:10.1177/0363546514541935

  174. Transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using living parental donor hamstring graft: excellent clinical results at 2 years in a cohort of 100 patients

    Ghosh K, Salmon LJ, Heath E, Pinczewski LA, Roe JP

    2020Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28(8):2511–2518 · PMID 32002563doi:10.1007/s00167-019-05842-3

  175. Higher risk of contralateral anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury within 2 years after ACL reconstruction in under-18-year-old patients with steep tibial plateau slope

    Grassi A, Pizza N, Zambon Bertoja J, Macchiarola L, Lucidi GA, Dal Fabbro G, Zaffagnini S

    2021Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 29(6):1690–1700 · PMID 32737527doi:10.1007/s00167-020-06195-y

  176. Return to sport for skeletally immature athletes after ACL reconstruction: preventing a second injury using a quality of movement assessment and quantitative measures to address modifiable risk factors

    Graziano J, Chiaia T, de Mille P, Nawabi DH, Green DW, Cordasco FA

    2017Orthop J Sports Med 5(4):2325967117700599 · PMID 28451617doi:10.1177/2325967117700599

  177. 5-year survival of pediatric anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with living donor hamstring tendon grafts

    Heath EL, Salmon LJ, Cooper R, Pappas E, Roe JP, Pinczewski LA

    2019Am J Sports Med 47(1):41–51 · PMID 30476437doi:10.1177/0363546518804502

  178. Risk factors for early ACL reconstruction failure in pediatric and adolescent patients: a review of 561 cases

    Ho B, Edmonds EW, Chambers HG, Bastrom TP, Pennock AT

    2018J Pediatr Orthop 38(7):388–392 · PMID 27379789doi:10.1097/BPO.0000000000000831

  179. Allograft and autograft transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in skeletally immature patients: outcomes and complications

    Larson CM, Heikes CS, Ellingson CI, Wulf CA, Giveans MR, Stone RM, Bedi A

    2016Arthroscopy 32(5):860–867 · PMID 26996346doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2015.10.014

  180. Fifteen-year survival of endoscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in patients aged 18 years and younger

    Morgan MD, Salmon LJ, Waller A, Roe JP, Pinczewski LA

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(2):384–392 · PMID 26759030doi:10.1177/0363546515623032

  181. Allograft augmentation of hamstring anterior cruciate ligament autografts is associated with increased graft failure in children and adolescents

    Perkins CA, Busch MT, Christino M, Herzog MM, Willimon SC

    2019Am J Sports Med 47(7):1576–1582 · PMID 31095404doi:10.1177/0363546519849607

  182. Validated pediatric functional outcomes of all-epiphyseal ACL reconstructions: does reinjury affect outcomes?

    Ranade SC, Refakis CA, Cruz AI, Leddy KL, Wells L, Lawrence JT, Ganley TJ

    2020J Pediatr Orthop 40(4):157–161 · PMID 32132445doi:10.1097/BPO.0000000000001217

  183. High satisfaction yet decreased activity 4 years after transphyseal ACL reconstruction

    Schmale GA, Kweon C, Larson RV, Bompadre V

    2014Clin Orthop Relat Res 472(7):2168–2174 · PMID 24634094doi:10.1007/s11999-014-3561-6

  184. Outcomes and complications after all-epiphyseal anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in skeletally immature patients

    Wall EJ, Ghattas PJ, Eismann EA, Myer GD, Carr P

    2017Orthop J Sports Med 5(3):2325967117693604 · PMID 28451597doi:10.1177/2325967117693604

  185. ACL repair with suture ligament augmentation is associated with a high failure rate among adolescent patients

    Gagliardi AG, Carry PM, Parikh HB, Traver JL, Howell DR, Albright JC

    2019Am J Sports Med 47(3):560–566 · PMID 30730755doi:10.1177/0363546518825255

  186. Epidemiology of recurrent anterior cruciate ligament injuries in National Collegiate Athletic Association Sports: the Injury Surveillance Program, 2004–2014

    Gans I, Retzky JS, Jones LC, Tanaka MJ

    2018Orthop J Sports Med 6(6):2325967118777823 · PMID 29977938doi:10.1177/2325967118777823

  187. High failure rate of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with bimeniscal repair: a case–control study

    Gonçalves H, Steltzlen C, Boisrenoult P, Beaufils P, Pujol N

    2017Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 103(6):943–946 · PMID 28552823doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2017.03.022

  188. Fifteen-year audit of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions in the Australian Football League from 1999 to 2013: return to play and subsequent ACL injury

    Lai CCH, Feller JA, Webster KE

    2018Am J Sports Med 46(14):3353–3360 · PMID 30388022doi:10.1177/0363546518803932

  189. Geometric risk factors associated with noncontact anterior cruciate ligament graft rupture

    Levins JG, Sturnick DR, Argentieri EC, Gardner-Morse M, Vacek PM, Desarno MJ, Tourville TW, Slauterbeck JR, Beynnon BD

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(10):2537–2545 · PMID 27514738doi:10.1177/0363546516657525

  190. Effect of high-grade preoperative knee laxity on 6-year anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction outcomes

    Magnussen RA, Reinke EK, Huston LJ, Hewett TE, Spindler KP, Amendola A, Andrish JT, Brophy RH, Dunn WR, Flanigan DC, et al.

    2018Am J Sports Med 46(12):2865–2872 · PMID 30193087doi:10.1177/0363546518793881

  191. How does obesity impact pediatric anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?

    Patel NM, Talathi NS, Bram JT, DeFrancesco CJ, Ganley TJ

    2019Arthroscopy 35(1):130–135 · PMID 30611340doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2018.07.044

  192. Self-reported fear predicts functional performance and second ACL injury after ACL reconstruction and return to sport: a pilot study

    Paterno MV, Flynn K, Thomas S, Schmitt LC

    2018Sports Health 10(3):228–233 · PMID 29272209doi:10.1177/1941738117745806

  193. Anterolateral ligament reconstruction is associated with significantly reduced ACL graft rupture rates at a minimum follow-up of 2 years: a prospective comparative study of 502 patients from the SANTI Study Group

    Sonnery-Cottet B, Saithna A, Cavalier M, Kajetanek C, Temponi EF, Daggett M, Helito CP, Thaunat M

    2017Am J Sports Med 45(7):1547–1557 · PMID 28151693doi:10.1177/0363546516686057

  194. An in-depth analysis of graft rupture and contralateral anterior cruciate ligament rupture rates after pediatric anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    DeFrancesco CJ, Striano BM, Bram JT, Baldwin KD, Ganley TJ

    2020Am J Sports Med 48(10):2395–2400 · PMID 32667824doi:10.1177/0363546520935437

  195. Concomitant posterolateral corner injuries in skeletally immature patients with acute anterior cruciate ligament injuries

    Kinsella SD, Rider SM, Fury MS, Tepolt FA, Ecklund K, Kocher MS

    2020J Pediatr Orthop 40(6):271–276 · PMID 32501906doi:10.1097/BPO.0000000000001450

  196. High rate of second ACL injury following ACL reconstruction in male professional footballers: an updated longitudinal analysis from 118 players in the UEFA Elite Club Injury Study

    Della Villa F, Hägglund M, Della Villa S, Ekstrand J, Waldén M

    2021Br J Sports Med 55:1379–1380 · PMID 34134973doi:10.1136/bjsports-2021-104508

  197. Adolescents show a lower healing rate of anterolateral ligament injury and a higher rotational laxity than adults after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Lee DW, Lee JK, Kwon SH, Moon SG, Cho SI, Chung SH, Kim JG

    2021Knee 30:113–124 · PMID 33894653doi:10.1016/j.knee.2021.03.020

  198. Preservation of the tibial stump during anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery did not increase the rate of surgery for symptomatic cyclops lesions

    Webster KE, Murgier J, Feller JA, Klemm HJ, Devitt BM, Whitehead TS

    2021Orthop J Sports Med 9(4):2325967121992517 · PMID 33889640doi:10.1177/2325967121992517

  199. Second ACL injury rates in younger athletes who were advised to delay return to sport until 12 months after ACL reconstruction

    Webster KE, Feller JA, Klemm HJ

    2021Orthop J Sports Med 9(2):2325967120985636 · PMID 33718503doi:10.1177/2325967120985636

  200. Return to sport after bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft ACL reconstruction in high school-aged athletes

    Rauck RC, Apostolakos JM, Nwachukwu BU, Schneider BL, Williams RJ, Dines JS, Altchek DW, Pearle A, Allen A, Stein BS, et al.

    2021Orthop J Sports Med 9(6):23259671211011510 · PMID 34250173doi:10.1177/23259671211011510

  201. Contralateral ACL tears strongly contribute to high rates of secondary ACL injuries in professional ski racers

    Csapo R, Runer A, Hoser C, Fink C

    2021Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 29(6):1805–1812 · PMID 32804249doi:10.1007/s00167-020-06234-8

  202. Predictive value of the magnetic resonance imaging-based coronal lateral collateral ligament sign on adolescent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction graft failure

    Mitchell BC, Siow MY, Bastrom T, Bomar JD, Pennock AT, Parvaresh K, Edmonds EW

    2021Am J Sports Med 49(4):935–940 · PMID 33617286doi:10.1177/0363546521988939

  203. Biomechanical but not strength or performance measures differentiate male athletes who experience ACL reinjury on return to level 1 sports

    King E, Richter C, Daniels KAJ, Franklyn-Miller A, Falvey E, Myer GD, Jackson M, Moran R, Strike S

    2021Am J Sports Med 49(4):918–927 · PMID 33617291doi:10.1177/0363546520988018

  204. Predicting ACL reinjury from return to activity assessments at 6-months post-surgery: a prospective cohort study

    Bodkin SG, Hertel J, Diduch DR, Saliba SA, Novicoff WM, Brockmeier SF, Miller MD, Gwathmey FW, Werner BC, Hart JM

    2021J Athl Train. · PMID 35439312doi:10.4085/1062-6050-0407.20

  205. Increased medial and lateral tibial posterior slopes are independent risk factors for graft failure following ACL reconstruction

    Jaecker V, Drouven S, Naendrup JH, Kanakamedala AC, Pfeiffer T, Shafizadeh S

    2018Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 138(10):1423–1431 · PMID 29808437doi:10.1007/s00402-018-2968-z

  206. Trusting systematic reviews and meta-analyses: all that glitters is not gold!

    Weir A, Rabia S, Ardern C

    2016Br J Sports Med 50(18):1100–1101 · PMID 26968215doi:10.1136/bjsports-2015-095896

  207. Klasan A, Putnis SE, Grasso S, Kandhari V, Oshima T, Parker DA. Tegner level is predictive for successful return to sport 2 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020.10.1007/s00167-020-06335-4PMC838478733118063

    Authors not recorded

    · PMID 33118063doi:10.1007/s00167-020-06335-4

  208. Assessing activity participation in the ACL injured population: a systematic review of activity rating scale measurement properties

    Letchford R, Button K, Sparkes V, van Deursen RWM

    2012Phys Therapy Rev 17(2):99–109doi:10.1179/1743288X11Y.0000000053

  209. A systematic review of sensorimotor function during adolescence: a developmental stage of increased motor awkwardness?

    Quatman-Yates CC, Quatman CE, Meszaros AJ, Paterno MV, Hewett TE

    2012Br J Sports Med 46(9):649–655 · PMID 21459874doi:10.1136/bjsm.2010.079616

  210. Differences in lower extremity anatomical and postural characteristics in males and females between maturation groups

    Shultz SJ, Nguyen AD, Schmitz RJ

    2008J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 38(3):137–149 · PMID 18383647doi:10.2519/jospt.2008.2645

  211. Young athletes return too early to knee-strenuous sport, without acceptable knee function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Beischer S, Hamrin Senorski E, Thomeé C, Samuelsson K, Thomeé R

    2018Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26(7):1966–1974 · PMID 29032484doi:10.1007/s00167-017-4747-8

  212. Risk factors for acute knee injury in female youth football

    Hägglund M, Waldén M

    2016Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(3):737–746 · PMID 26704794doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3922-z

  213. Is there a genetic predisposition to anterior cruciate ligament tear? A systematic review

    John R, Dhillon MS, Sharma S, Prabhakar S, Bhandari M

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(12):3262–3269 · PMID 26842309doi:10.1177/0363546515624467

  214. Multiple risk factors related to familial predisposition to anterior cruciate ligament injury: fraternal twin sisters with anterior cruciate ligament ruptures

    Hewett TE, Lynch TR, Myer GD, Ford KR, Gwin RC, Heidt RS

    2010Br J Sports Med 44(12):848–855 · PMID 19158132doi:10.1136/bjsm.2008.055798

  215. In vivo evidence for tibial plateau slope as a risk factor for anterior cruciate ligament injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Wordeman SC, Quatman CE, Kaeding CC, Hewett TE

    2012Am J Sports Med 40(7):1673–1681 · PMID 22539537doi:10.1177/0363546512442307

  216. Knee joint anatomy predicts high-risk in vivo dynamic landing knee biomechanics

    McLean SG, Lucey SM, Rohrer S, Brandon C

    2010Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 25(8):781–788 · PMID 20605063doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.06.002

  217. Tibial plateau geometry influences lower extremity biomechanics during landing

    Shultz SJ, Schmitz RJ

    2012Am J Sports Med 40(9):2029–2036 · PMID 22837428doi:10.1177/0363546512453295

  218. A case–control study of anterior cruciate ligament volume, tibial plateau slopes and intercondylar notch dimensions in ACL-injured knees

    Simon RA, Everhart JS, Nagaraja HN, Chaudhari AM

    2010J Biomech 43(9):1702–1707 · PMID 20385387doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.02.033

  219. Effect of posterior tibial slope on knee biomechanics during functional activity

    Shelburne KB, Kim HJ, Sterett WI, Pandy MG

    2011J Orthop Res 29(2):223–231 · PMID 20857489doi:10.1002/jor.21242

  220. Tibial translation after anterior cruciate ligament rupture. Two radiological tests compared

    Dejour H, Bonnin M

    1994J Bone Jt Surg Br 76(5):745–749 · PMID 8083263doi:10.1302/0301-620X.76B5.8083263

  221. Preoperative patient and injury factors of successful rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with single-bundle techniques

    de Valk EJ, Moen MH, Winters M, Bakker EW, Tamminga R, van der Hoeven H

    2013Arthroscopy 29(11):1879–1895 · PMID 24209682doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2013.07.273

  222. Laxity, instability, and functional outcome after ACL injury: copers versus noncopers

    Eastlack ME, Axe MJ, Snyder-Mackler L

    1999Med Sci Sports Exerc 31(2):210–215 · PMID 10063808doi:10.1097/00005768-199902000-00002

  223. Coper classification early after anterior cruciate ligament rupture changes with progressive neuromuscular and strength training and is associated with 2-year success: the Delaware-Oslo ACL cohort study

    Thoma LM, Grindem H, Logerstedt D, Axe M, Engebretsen L, Risberg MA, Snyder-Mackler L

    2019Am J Sports Med 47(4):807–814 · PMID 30790527doi:10.1177/0363546519825500

  224. Do cartilage lesions affect the clinical outcome of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A systematic review

    Filardo G, de Caro F, Andriolo L, Kon E, Zaffagnini S, Marcacci M

    2017Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25(10):3061–3075 · PMID 27043346doi:10.1007/s00167-016-4097-y

  225. Influence of meniscal and chondral lesions on patient-reported outcomes after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction at 2-year follow-up

    Cinque ME, Chahla J, Mitchell JJ, Moatshe G, Pogorzelski J, Murphy CP, Kennedy NI, Godin JA, LaPrade RF

    2018Orthop J Sports Med 6(2):2325967117754189 · PMID 29468171doi:10.1177/2325967117754189

  226. Are articular cartilage lesions and meniscus tears predictive of IKDC, KOOS, and Marx activity level outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A 6-year multicenter cohort study

    Cox CL, Huston LJ, Dunn WR, Reinke EK, Nwosu SK, Parker RD, Wright RW, Kaeding CC, Marx RG, Amendola A, et al.

    2014Am J Sports Med 42(5):1058–1067 · PMID 24647881doi:10.1177/0363546514525910

  227. Injury risk in professional basketball players: a comparison of Women's National Basketball Association and National Basketball Association athletes

    Deitch JR, Starkey C, Walters SL, Moseley JB

    2006Am J Sports Med 34(7):1077–1083 · PMID 16493173doi:10.1177/0363546505285383

  228. Sex differences in the incidence of anterior cruciate ligament, medial collateral ligament, and meniscal injuries in Collegiate and High School sports: 2009–2010 through 2013–2014

    Stanley LE, Kerr ZY, Dompier TP, Padua DA

    2016Am J Sports Med 44(6):1565–1572 · PMID 26940226doi:10.1177/0363546516630927

  229. "What's my risk of sustaining an ACL injury while playing sports?" A systematic review with meta-analysis

    Montalvo AM, Schneider DK, Yut L, Webster KE, Beynnon B, Kocher MS, Myer GD

    2019Br J Sports Med 53(16):1003–1012 · PMID 29514822doi:10.1136/bjsports-2016-096274

  230. A meta-analysis of the incidence of anterior cruciate ligament tears as a function of gender, sport, and a knee injury-reduction regimen

    Prodromos CC, Han Y, Rogowski J, Joyce B, Shi K

    2007Arthroscopy 23(12):1320–1325 e1326 · PMID 18063176doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2007.07.003

  231. The effect of menstrual cycle and contraceptives on ACL injuries and laxity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Herzberg SD, Motu'apuaka ML, Lambert W, Fu R, Brady J, Guise JM

    2017Orthop J Sports Med 5(7):2325967117718781 · PMID 28795075doi:10.1177/2325967117718781

  232. Pediatric anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review of transphyseal versus physeal-sparing techniques

    Pierce TP, Issa K, Festa A, Scillia AJ, McInerney VK

    2017Am J Sports Med 45(2):488–494 · PMID 27045088doi:10.1177/0363546516638079

  233. Return to sport tests' prognostic value for reinjury risk after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review

    Ashigbi EYK, Banzer W, Niederer D

    2020Med Sci Sports Exerc 52(6):1263–1271 · PMID 31895299doi:10.1249/MSS.0000000000002246

  234. Pain and negative mood during rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a daily process analysis

    Brewer BW, Cornelius AE, Sklar JH, Van Raalte JL, Tennen H, Armeli S, Corsetti JR, Brickner JC

    2007Scand J Med Sci Sports 17(5):520–529 · PMID 17076828doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2006.00601.x

  235. Psychological predictors of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction outcomes: a systematic review

    Everhart JS, Best TM, Flanigan DC

    2015Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(3):752–762 · PMID 24126701doi:10.1007/s00167-013-2699-1

  236. Psychosocial responses during different phases of sport-injury rehabilitation: a qualitative study

    Clement D, Arvinen-Barrow M, Fetty T

    2015J Athl Train 50(1):95–104 · PMID 25322346doi:10.4085/1062-6050-49.3.52

  237. How much do psychological factors affect lack of return to play after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A systematic review

    Nwachukwu BU, Adjei J, Rauck RC, Chahla J, Okoroha KR, Verma NN, Allen AA, Williams RJ

    2019Orthop J Sports Med 7(5):2325967119845313 · PMID 31205965doi:10.1177/2325967119845313

  238. Development and preliminary validation of a scale to measure the psychological impact of returning to sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery

    Webster KE, Feller JA, Lambros C

    2008Phys Ther Sport 9(1):9–15 · PMID 19083699doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2007.09.003

  239. Do knee abduction kinematics and kinetics predict future anterior cruciate ligament injury risk? A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

    Cronström A, Creaby MW, Ageberg E

    2020BMC Musculoskelet Disord 21(1):563 · PMID 32819327doi:10.1186/s12891-020-03552-3

  240. Nilstad A, Petushek E, Mok KM, Bahr R, Krosshaug T. Kiss goodbye to the 'kissing knees': no association between frontal plane inward knee motion and risk of future non-contact ACL injury in elite female athletes. Sports Biomech. 2021:1–15.10.1080/14763141.2021.190354133906580

    Authors not recorded

    · PMID 33906580doi:10.1080/14763141.2021.1903541

  241. Quantifying frontal plane knee motion during single limb squats: reliability and validity of 2-dimensional measures

    Gwynne CR, Curran SA

    2014Int J Sports Phys Ther 9(7):898–906 · PMID 25540705

  242. Evaluation of a two dimensional analysis method as a screening and evaluation tool for anterior cruciate ligament injury

    McLean SG, Walker K, Ford KR, Myer GD, Hewett TE, van den Bogert AJ

    2005Br J Sports Med 39(6):355–362 · PMID 15911607doi:10.1136/bjsm.2005.018598

  243. Two- and three-dimensional relationships between knee and hip kinematic motion analysis: single-leg drop-jump landings

    Sorenson B, Kernozek TW, Willson JD, Ragan R, Hove J

    2015J Sport Rehabil 24(4):363–372 · PMID 25658442doi:10.1123/jsr.2014-0206

  244. The relationship between 2D knee valgus angle during single leg squat (SLS), single leg landing (SLL), and forward running

    Atkin K

    2017Br J Sports Med 26:72–77

  245. Differences and correlations in knee and hip mechanics during single-leg landing, single-leg squat, double-leg landing, and double-leg squat tasks

    Donohue MR, Ellis SM, Heinbaugh EM, Stephenson ML, Zhu Q, Dai B

    2015Res Sports Med 23(4):394–411 · PMID 26275102doi:10.1080/15438627.2015.1076413

  246. Athletic identity and sport commitment in athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction who have returned to sports at their pre-injury level of competition

    Ohji S, Aizawa J, Hirohata K, Mitomo S, Ohmi T, Jinno T, Koga H, Yagishita K

    2021BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil 13(1):37 · PMID 33827671doi:10.1186/s13102-021-00264-6

  247. Self-protective changes in athletic identity following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

    Brewer BW, Cornelius AE

    2010Psychol Sport Exerc 11(1):1–5 · PMID 20161402doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2009.09.005

  248. "Not always a straight path": patients' perspectives following anterior cruciate ligament rupture and reconstruction

    Scott SM, Perry MA, Sole G

    2018Disabil Rehabil 40(19):2311–2317 · PMID 28597696doi:10.1080/09638288.2017.1335803

  249. Quality of life and life satisfaction in former athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Filbay S, Pandya T, Thomas B, McKay C, Adams J, Arden N

    2019Sports Med 49(11):1723–1738 · PMID 31429036doi:10.1007/s40279-019-01163-0

  250. Athletes’ Rights and Responsibilities Declaration. https://www.coe.int/en/web/sport/-/ioc-athletes-rights-and-responsibilities-declaration-2018

    Authors not recorded

  251. Allograft for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR): a systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term comparative effectiveness and safety results of a health technology assessment

    Goetz G, de Villiers C, Sadoghi P, Geiger-Gritsch S

    2020Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil 2(6):e873–e891 · PMID 33376999doi:10.1016/j.asmr.2020.07.003

  252. Hamstring autograft versus patellar tendon autograft for ACL reconstruction: is there a difference in graft failure rate? A meta-analysis of 47,613 patients

    Samuelsen BT, Webster KE, Johnson NR, Hewett TE, Krych AJ

    2017Clin Orthop Relat Res 475(10):2459–2468 · PMID 28205075doi:10.1007/s11999-017-5278-9

  253. The heterogeneity statistic I(2) can be biased in small meta-analyses

    von Hippel PT

    2015BMC Med Res Methodol 15:35 · PMID 25880989doi:10.1186/s12874-015-0024-z

  254. What is so odd about odds?

    Montreuil B, Bendavid Y, Brophy J

    2005Can J Surg 48(5):400–408 · PMID 16248140

Article record

The record

Status

Living reprint · journal article Journal version available

Status
Version of record: Sports Medicine 2023
Journal version
Sports Medicine (2023) · doi:10.1007/s40279-022-01747-3
Confirmed
2022-08-24
Licence
CC BY 4.0

This reprint has no DOI of its own: cite the journal article.

The journal's version is the version of record. This page re-typesets it under the article's licence; where they differ, the journal's version is authoritative.

Version history

  1. Published in Sports Medicine2022-08-24
  2. Living reprint on Literature Decoded2026-10-01
  3. Reprinted here2026-10-01
  4. This HTML2026-10-01

Cite this article

Citation
Cronström A, Tengman E, Häger CK. Return to Sports: A Risky Business? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Risk Factors for Graft Rupture Following ACL Reconstruction. Sports Med. 2023;53(1):91–110. doi:10.1007/s40279-022-01747-3
BibTeX
@article{Cronstrm2023Return,
  title   = {Return to Sports: A Risky Business? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Risk Factors for Graft Rupture Following ACL Reconstruction},
  author  = {Anna Cronström and Eva Tengman and Charlotte K. Häger},
  journal = {Sports Medicine},
  year    = {2023},
  volume  = {53},
  number  = {1},
  pages   = {91–110},
  doi     = {10.1007/s40279-022-01747-3},
  pmid    = {36001289}
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Return to Sports: A Risky Business? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Risk Factors for Graft Rupture Following ACL Reconstruction
AU  - Anna Cronström
AU  - Eva Tengman
AU  - Charlotte K. Häger
JO  - Sports Medicine
PY  - 2023
VL  - 53
IS  - 1
SP  - 91
EP  - 110
DO  - 10.1007/s40279-022-01747-3
SN  - 0112-1642
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-022-01747-3
ER  -

Cite the original article (the version of record), not this reprint.

Take it with you

One self-contained HTML file: the text, data and figures, readable offline.

Disclaimer and limitations

Educational summary of research findings; not medical advice. Discuss care decisions with a qualified clinician.

The findings apply to the included study populations and may not generalise to every person or setting.

Licence and attribution

This page reproduces Return to Sports: A Risky Business? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Risk Factors for Graft Rupture Following ACL Reconstruction by Anna Cronström, Eva Tengman, Charlotte K. Häger, first published in Sports Medicine 2023;53(1):91–110, doi:10.1007/s40279-022-01747-3, PMID 36001289, PMC9807539. © The Author(s) 2022. It is used under the CC BY 4.0 licence.

Changes made:

The words, data, figures and conclusions are the authors’. Literature Decoded is not the publisher of record and does not claim endorsement by the authors or the journal. The version of record is the journal’s; cite it.

Licence statement in the article: “Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.”

Are you an author of this article? Claim it or ask us to take it down.

Cite this article

Living reprint · journal article