↓ Skip to main content

Management of anterior cruciate ligament rupture in patients aged 40 years and older

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
Title
Management of anterior cruciate ligament rupture in patients aged 40 years and older
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, November 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10195-011-0167-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudio Legnani, Clara Terzaghi, Enrico Borgo, Alberto Ventura

Abstract

The aim of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is essentially to restore functional stability of the knee and to allow patients to return to their desired work and activities. While in the young and active population, surgery is often the best therapeutic option after an ACL tear, ACL reconstruction in middle-aged people is rather more controversial due to concerns about a higher complication rate. The purpose of our article is to establish, through a systematic review of the literature, useful decision-making criteria for the management of anterior cruciate ligament rupture in patients aged 40 years and older, guiding surgeons to the most appropriate therapeutic approach. Various reports have shown excellent results of ACL reconstruction in patients over the age of 40 in terms of subjective satisfaction, return to previous activity level, and reduced complication and failure rates. Some even document excellent outcomes in subjects of 50 years and older. Although there are limited high-level studies, data reported in the literature suggest that ACL reconstruction can be successful in appropriately selected, motivated older patients with symptomatic knee instability who want to return to participating in highly demanding sport and recreational activities. Deciding factors are based on occupation, sex, activity level of the subject, amount of time spent performing such highly demanding activities, and presence of associated knee lesions. Physiological age and activity level are more important than chronological age as deciding factors when considering ACL reconstruction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 112 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 14%
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 20 17%
Unknown 28 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 15%
Sports and Recreations 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 33 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 February 2014.
All research outputs
#14,081,606
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
#103
of 222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,020
of 144,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 222 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 144,455 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.