GøtzschePCHróbjartssonAMaricKTendalB.Data extraction errors in meta-analyses that use standardized mean differences. JAMA. 2007;298(4):430-437.
2.
HelitoCPSobradoMFGiglioPN, et al. Combined reconstruction of the anterolateral ligament in patients with anterior cruciate ligament injury and ligamentous hyperlaxity leads to better clinical stability and a lower failure rate than isolated anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2019;35(9):2648-2654.
3.
HigginsJPTAltmanDGGotzschePC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011;343:d5928-d5928.
4.
MercurioMCofanoEGaspariniG, et al. Isolated ACL reconstruction versus combined ACL and anterolateral ligament reconstruction: functional outcomes, return to sport, and survivorship: an updated meta-analysis of comparative studies. Am J Sports Med. 2025;53(4):971-980.
5.
Sonnery-CottetBHaidarIRayesJ, et al. Long-term graft rupture rates after combined ACL and anterolateral ligament reconstruction versus isolated ACL reconstruction: a matched-pair analysis from the SANTI Study Group. Am J Sports Med. 2021;49(11):2889-2897.
6.
Sonnery-CottetBSaithnaABlakeneyWG, et al. Anterolateral ligament reconstruction protects the repaired medial meniscus: a comparative study of 383 anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions from the SANTI Study Group with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Am J Sports Med. 2018;46(8):1819-1826.
7.
Sonnery-CottetBSaithnaACavalierM, et al. Anterolateral ligament reconstruction is associated with significantly reduced ACL graft rupture rates at a minimum follow-up of 2 years: a prospective comparative study of 502 patients from the SANTI Study Group. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(7):1547-1557.
8.
UttleyLQuintanaDSMontgomeryP, et al. The problems with systematic reviews: a living systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 2023;156:30-41.
