Skip to main content
. 2018 Aug 9;4:37. doi: 10.1186/s40798-018-0145-0

Table 2.

Demographic data and mean follow-up per clinical study

Study Technique Number of patients Sex Mean age (years) Follow-up
(months)
Bieri et al. [31] DIS 53-DIS
53 Conventional reconstruction
43M:10F
Per group
30 (1st group)
31 (2nd group)
24
Büchler et al. [38] DIS 45 32M-13F 26 12
Eggli et al. [39] DIS 10 8M-2F 23.3 60
Evangelopoulos et al. [40] DIS 23 With collagen application, 33 without collagen application 15M-8F (1st group)
24M-9F (2nd group)
30 (1st group)
27 (2nd group)
24
Kösters et al. [41] DIS 55 31M-24F 30.4 12
Henle et al. [20] DIS 278 163M-115F 31 24
Murray et al. [32] BEAR 20 (2 groups of 10) 4M-6F (BEAR)
2M-8F (Control)
24.1 (BEAR)
24.6 (Control)
3
Smith et al. [33] Internal brace 3 1M-2F 6 12
21
24
Achtnich et al. [34] Anchors primary ACL repair 21 (Anchors primary ACL repair)-20 (control) No significant difference between sexes 30 (Anchors primary ACL repair)
33.6 (Control)
28
DiFelice et al. [42] Anchors primary ACL repair 11 10M-1F 37 42

DIS dynamic intraligamentary stabilization, BEAR bridge-enhanced ACL repair, M males, F females, ACL anterior cruciate ligament