Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 240

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Single– versus two–femoral socket anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction technique

Mae, Tatsuo, Shino, Konsei, Miyama, Takahide, Shinjo, Hirotaka, Ochi, Takahiro, Yoshikawa, Hideki, Fujie, Hiromichi·2001·Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

Abstract

PURPOSE: Although anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with multistrand autogenous hamstring tendons has been widely performed using a single femoral socket (SS), it is currently advocated to individually reconstruct 2 bundles of the ACL using 2 femoral sockets (TS). However, the difference in biomechanical characteristics between them is unknown. The objective of this study was to clarify their biomechanical differences. TYPE OF STUDY: This is a cross-over trial using cadaveric knees. METHODS: Seven intact human cadaveric knees were mounted in a robotic simulator developed in our laboratory. By applying anterior and posterior tibial load up to +/- 100 N at 0 degrees, 15 degrees, 30 degrees, 60 degrees, and 90 degrees of flexion, tibial displacement and load were recorded. After cutting the ACL, the knees underwent ACL reconstruction using TS, followed by that using SS, with 44 or 88 N of initial grafts tension at 20 degrees of flexion. The above-mentioned tests were performed on each reconstructed knee. RESULTS: The tibial displacement in the TS technique was significantly smaller than that in the SS at smaller flexion angles in response to anterior and posterior tibial load of +/- 100 N, and the in situ force in the former was significantly greater than that in the latter at smaller flexion angles. Furthermore, in the TS technique, the posterolateral graft acted dominantly in extension, while the anteromedial graft mainly resisted against anterior tibial load in flexion. However, in the SS technique, the anteriorly located graft functioned more predominantly than the posteriorly located graft at all flexion angles. CONCLUSIONS: The ACL reconstruction via TS using quadrupled hamstring tendons provides better anterior-posterior stability compared with the conventional reconstruction using a single socket.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1053/jars.2001.25250

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 240

Metadata

Authors
Mae, T., Shino, K., Miyama, T., Shinjo, H., Ochi, T., Yoshikawa, H., & Fujie, H.
Venue
Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-09
Volume
17
Issue
7
Pages
708-716
ISSN
0749-8063 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W56391876
Cited by
240
References
1
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Single– versus two–femoral socket anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction technique. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1053/jars.2001.25250
The paper
Mae, T., Shino, K., Miyama, T., Shinjo, H., Ochi, T., Yoshikawa, H., & Fujie, H. (2001). Single– versus two–femoral socket anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction technique. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1053/jars.2001.25250

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.