Citation

Li Z. Int. J. Sports Med. 2022; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, Georg Thieme Verlag)

DOI

10.1055/a-1755-4925

PMID

35100655

Abstract

We aim to compare the curative effect of primary repair for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury with reconstruction and provide the reliable evidence for its clinical application. The literatures were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Springer, and other medical literature databases published between January 1970 and June 2021. Basic characteristics, surgery technique, clinical outcome scores and physical examination results were recorded and evaluated. Seven randomized controlled trials (RCT) were eligible for inclusion. The results showed that there were no statistically significant differences between arthroscopic ACL repair and ACL reconstruction for Tegner, Lysholm, Lachman, KT-1000, range of motion (ROM), functional outcomes and reoperation rate (P > 0.05), even the result of IKDC scores showed that arthroscopic repair was better than reconstruction (P = 0.04). However, through the subgroup analysis, it was found that the short-term follow-up results of arthroscopic ACL repair were indeed better than those of open ACL repair. Therefore, we can assume that the arthroscopic ACL repair technique is an optional and promising surgical method to treat ACL injury.

Language: en