Table 3.

Outcome measurements: strength and torque values are expressed in Newton-meters [N·m], Newton [N], or Newton-meters/kilograms. Abbreviations: IQR (interquartile range); mo (months).

Author	Type of Dynamometer	Outcome Measurements	Residual Deficit/Gain (Absolute and in Percentage)
Mikashima et al. [43]	Mobile	Strength of extension of affected/non-affected knee (% affected/not affected limb)	Intervention 1: −33.2% (quadriceps mean power = 66.8 ± 7.2%) Intervention 2: −24.7% (quadriceps mean power = 75.3 ± 23.3%)
Woods et al. [48]	Isokinetic	Knee extension moment 90°/s [N·m]	Residual deficit of −10.5, −8.5 with respect to the baseline (−20.2%); from 32.3 ± 13.9 pre-operative to 41.5 ± 12.9 at the follow-up in the involved quadriceps; from 51.3 ± 12.8 pre-operative to 52.0 ± 13.5 at the follow-up in the uninvolved quadriceps Gain of 9.2 (28.5%); 32.3 ± 13.9 pre-operation and 41.5 ± 12.9 at the follow-up in the involved quadriceps
Ronga et al. [44]	Isokinetic	Maximum average knee extension torque at 60°/s [N·m]	−60.2 (−33.7%); 118.3 ± 47.8 in the operated limb, 178.5 ± 37.3 in the non-operated limb
		Maximum average knee extension torque at 120°/s [N·m]	−56 (−37.3%); 94 ± 49.7 in the operated limb, 150 ± 31 in the non-operated limb
Smith et al. [45]	Mobile	Isometric knee extension force at 0° [N]	Gain of 25.8 (80.4%); 32.1 ± 14.6 at baseline, 30.1 ± 14.4 at 1.5 mo, 44.2 ± 20.6 at 3 mo, 57.9 ± 24.6 at 12 mo
		Isometric knee extension force at 40° [N]	Gain of 40.7 (91.5%); 44.5 ± 28.6 at baseline, 50.3 ± 28.7 at 1.5 mo, 63.2 ± 41.4 at 3 mo, 85.2 ± 38.8 at 12 mo
		Isometric knee extension force at 80° [N]	Gain of 40.9 (68.1%); 60.1 ± 47.0 at baseline, 69.1 ± 33.3 at 1.5 mo, 88.3 ± 48.7 at 3 mo, 101.0 ± 49.4 at 12 mo
Tompkins et al. [47]	Mobile	Average isometric knee extension torque at 30° [Nm/kg]	Intervention 1: −0.09 (−7.8%); 1.07 [95% CI 0.82–1.32] in the involved side and 1.16 [95% CI 0.92–1.4] in the uninvolved side Intervention 2: −0.09 (−7.6%); 1.09 [95% CI 0.77–1.41] in the involved side and 1.18 [95% CI 0.91–1.45] in the uninvolved side
		Average isometric knee extension torque at 60° [Nm/kg]	Intervention 1: −0.09 (−4.7%); 1.82 [95% CI 1.51–2.13] in the involved side and 1.91 [95% CI 1.43–2.39] in the uninvolved side Intervention 2: −0.36 (−16.6%); 1.81 [95% CI 1.28–2.34] in involved side and 2.17 [95% CI 1.71–2.63] in uninvolved side
Smith et al. [46]	Mobile	Knee extension force at 0° [N]	Intervention 1: gain of 61.9 (172.9%); 35.8 ± 38.9 at baseline, 93.5 ± 47.1 at 1.5 mo, 110.9 (IQR 50.6–159.2) at 6 mo, 91.5 (IQR 75.0–126.5) at 12 mo Intervention 2: gain of 74.1 (221.9%); 33.4 ± 43.8 at baseline, 83.9 ± 38.4 at 1.5 mo, 94.4 (IQR 81.3–143.2) at 6 mo, 102.5 (IQR 83.6–136.5) at 12 mo
		Knee extension force at 30° [N]	Intervention 1: gain of 115.7 (134.7%); 85.9 ± 58.8 at baseline, 167.1 ± 66.5 at 1.5 mo, 177.0 (IQR 124.2–202.4) at 6 mo, 190.4 (IQR 178.2–236.1) at 12 mo Intervention 2: gain of 104.5 (116.2%); 89.9 ± 50.5 at baseline, 164.7 ± 70.2 at 1.5 mo, 170.5 (IQR 136.2–196.4) at 6 mo, 186.6 (IQR 146.1–250.5) at 12 mo
		Knee extension force at 60° [N]	Intervention 1: gain of 120.9 (123.5%); 97.9 ± 48.5 at baseline, 172.0 ± 56.1 at 1.5 mo, 216.9 (IQR 148.9–236.6) at 6 mo, 230.4 (IQR 158.8–267.1) at 12 mo Intervention 2: gain of 105.4 (90.7%); 116.2 ± 65.4 at baseline, 180.3 ± 74.1 at 1.5 mo, 204.5 (IQR 136.3–253.0) at 6 mo, 228.7 (IQR 154.7–281.5) at 12 mo
		Knee extension force at 90° [N]	Intervention 1: gain of 135.0 (146.9%); 100.4 ± 64.9 at baseline, 177.6 ± 63.8) at 1.5 mo, 189.8 (IQR 148.5–237.7) at 6 mo, 247.9 (IQR 178.8–281.1) at 12 mo Intervention 2: 120.8 (102.1%); 118.3 ± 89.2 at baseline, 181.6 ± 75.0 at 1.5 mo, 245.0 (IQR 134.3–267.4) at 6 mo, 258.4 (IQR 172.2–286.6) at 12 mo
Asaeda et al. [40]	Mobile	Strength of extension of affected/non-affected knee (% affected/not affected limb)	−34.3%; 86.4 ± 42.3% pre-operative, 59.8 ± 39.5% at 3 mo, 67.9 ± 23.5% at 6 mo, 52.1 ± 24.3% at 12 mo
Arrebola et al. [39]	Mobile	Quadriceps strength [kgf/kg·100]	−53.44 (−43.7%); 40.44 ± 12.33 in the experimental group and 71.84 ± 14.22 in the control group (Cohen’s d = 2.35) −6.98 (−14.8%); 40.14 ± 12.99 in the affected side and 47.12 ± 12.88 in the non-affected side in a subsample (Cohen’s d = 0.53)
Keilani et al. [41]	Isokinetic	Peak torque at 60°/s knee extension normalized to participant’s body weight [Nm/kg]	Intervention 1: −17% with respect to sex and age-related reference values Intervention 2: −15% with respect to sex and age-related reference values Intervention 1: −16% muscle strength compared to Intervention 2
Lucas et al. [42]	Mobile	Knee extension force [Nm/kg]	−9.3 (−39.1%); 14.5 ± 4.1 in the experimental group and 23.8 ± 7.2 in the control group (Cohen’s d = 1.24)