Table 1.
Clinical trials that compared two or more surgical techniques for PCL reconstruction and reasons for exclusion from final analysis
| Techniques compared | Study design | Number of patients | Minimum follow-up | Tibial tunnel placement | Reasons for exclusion | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ahn et al. [1] | Hamstring tendon autograft versus Achilles tendon allograft | Retrospective case–control | 36 | 2 Years | No description | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| Chen et al. [5] | Quadriceps versus quadruple hamstring PCL reconstruction | Retrospective case series | 49 | 2 Years | Distal and lateral on footprint | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| Freeman et al. [11] | With or without posterolateral corner reconstruction | Retrospective case series | 17 | 14 Months | No description | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| Hatayama et al. [16] | Single- versus double-bundle PCL reconstruction | Retrospective case series | 20 | 2 Years | No description | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| Jung et al. [18] | Fibular head or tibial tunnel for posterolateral corner reconstruction | Retrospective case series | 39 | 2 Years | No description | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| Kim et al. [20] | Tibial tunnel single versus inlay single versus inlay double | Retrospective case series | 29 | 2 Years | No description | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| Kim et al. [21] | 1 versus 2 incision PCL reconstruction | Retrospective case series | 55 | 2 Years | 1.5 cm below the articular margin | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| Li et al. [22] | Hamstring graft versus LARS artificial ligament | Retrospective case series | 36 | 2 Years | Distal and lateral on footprint, 8–10 mm from articular joint | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| MacGillivray et al. [25] | Tibial inlay versus tibial tunnel technique | Retrospective case series | 20 | 2 Years | No description | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| Wang et al. [41] | Autograft versus allograft PCL reconstruction | Prospective randomized study | 55 | 2 Years | 1 cm below the articular surface of the medial plateau | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| Wang et al. [42] | Single- versus double-bundle PCL reconstruction | Prospective randomized study | 35 | 2 Years | 1 cm below the articular surface of the medial plateau | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
| Wong et al. [43] | Anteromedial versus anterolateral transtibial approach | Prospective randomized study | 55 | 3 Years | 1 cm below the articular surface of the medial plateau | No variation of tibial tunnel position |
LARS ligament augmentation and reconstruction system