All-inside vs. conventional method in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction: systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: Injury to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) was prevalent among sports, with a female predominance. If not treated properly, ACL deficiency knee can cause significant morbidity and long-term impairment. The most often utilized reconstructive methods in modern clinical practice were conventional and all-inside treatments. This study compared all-inside and conventional ACL reconstruction methods through systematic review and meta-analysis. Method: The searching protocol was carried out using several databases, such as PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar, to identify relevant topics in May 2022. This study used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis 2020 (PRISMA) guidelines. Result: There were 17 studies included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. All of the reviewed studies were written in English. Most of the included studies were carried out in Europe. Theafollowaup duration range from 3amonthsato 4ayears. The total participants were 2329 patients with ACL reconstructions. There was a significant difference between groups in the overall analysis, with the all-inside technique having higher Lysholm score outcomes than the conventional technique (MD = 1.87; 95% CI = 0.41–3.33; p < 0.05) Conclusion: All-inside technique has higher Lysohlm score outcome than the conventional technique. There is no significant difference in pain and IKDC score between both groups.