Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 523

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Allograft Versus Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Predictors of Failure From a MOON Prospective Longitudinal Cohort

Open access
Kaeding, Christopher C., Aros, Brian, Pedroza, Angela, Pifel, Eric, Amendola, Annunziato, Andrish, Jack T., Dunn, Warren R., Marx, Robert G., McCarty, Eric C., Parker, Richard D., Wright, Rick W., Spindler, Kurt P.·2011·Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach

Abstract

Background: Tearing an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft is a devastating occurrence after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Identifying and understanding the independent predictors of ACLR graft failure is important for surgical planning, patient counseling, and efforts to decrease the risk of graft failure. Hypothesis: Patient and surgical variables will predict graft failure after ACLR. Study Design: Prospective cohort study. Methods: A multicenter group initiated a cohort study in 2002 to identify predictors of ACLR outcomes, including graft failure. First, to control for confounders, a single surgeon’s data (n = 281 ACLRs) were used to develop a multivariable regression model for ACLR graft failure. Evaluated variables were graft type (autograft vs allograft), sex, age, body mass index, activity at index injury, presence of a meniscus tear, and primary versus revision reconstruction. Second, the model was validated with the rest of the multicenter study’s data (n = 645 ACLRs) to evaluate the generalizability of the model. Results: Patient age and ACL graft type were significant predictors of graft failure for all study surgeons. Patients in the age group of 10 to 19 years had the highest percentage of graft failures. The odds of graft rupture with an allograft reconstruction are 4 times higher than those of autograft reconstructions. For each 10-year decrease in age, the odds of graft rupture increase 2.3 times. Conclusion: There is an increased risk of ACL graft rupture in patients who have undergone allograft reconstruction. Younger patients also have an increased risk of ACL graft failure. Clinical Relevance: Given these risks for ACL graft rupture, allograft ACLRs should be performed with caution in the younger patient population.

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 · 10.1177/1941738110386185

Cites

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 523

Metadata

Authors
Kaeding, C. C., Aros, B., Pedroza, A., Pifel, E., Amendola, A., Andrish, J. T., Dunn, W. R., Marx, R. G., McCarty, E. C., Parker, R. D., Wright, R. W., & Spindler, K. P.
Venue
Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach
Published
2010-10-12
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
73-81
ISSN
  • 1941-0921 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-7381
OpenAlex
W2153334341
Cited by
523
References
0
FWCI
10.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Allograft Versus Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Predictors of Failure From a MOON Prospective Longitudinal Cohort. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1941738110386185
The paper
Kaeding, C. C., Aros, B., Pedroza, A., Pifel, E., Amendola, A., Andrish, J. T., Dunn, W. R., Marx, R. G., McCarty, E. C., Parker, R. D., Wright, R. W., & Spindler, K. P. (2011). Allograft Versus Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Predictors of Failure From a MOON Prospective Longitudinal Cohort. Sports Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach. https://doi.org/10.1177/1941738110386185

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.