Greater return to sports after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction combined with anterolateral ligament reconstruction compared with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction alone: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
2025

Better Sports Return After Combined ACL and ALL Reconstruction

Sample size: 2357 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Lumban‐Gaol Imelda, Putramega Dananjaya, Phatama Krisna Yuarno, Utomo Dwikora Novembri, Budhiparama Nicolaas C.

Primary Institution: Nicolaas Institute of Constructive Orthopaedic Research & Education Foundation for Arthroplasty & Sports Medicine at Medistra Hospital Jakarta Indonesia

Hypothesis

Does combining anterolateral ligament reconstruction with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction improve return to sports compared to ACL reconstruction alone?

Conclusion

Patients who underwent ACLR with ALLR had higher rates of return to sports and competition, but their activity and psychological readiness scores were similar to those who had ACLR alone.

Supporting Evidence

  • ACLR combined with ALLR resulted in a higher rate of return to sports and competition.
  • Only 82% of patients can resume sports activities after ACLR.
  • 63% return to their preinjury level and 44% return to competitive sports after ACLR.

Takeaway

This study found that more people can go back to playing sports after having two surgeries instead of just one. But how active they feel and their confidence in returning to sports were about the same for both groups.

Methodology

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing outcomes of ACLR with and without ALLR, including literature search, data extraction, and quality assessment.

Potential Biases

The lack of randomization in non-RCTs may introduce bias.

Limitations

The study included a limited number of studies with varying designs, which may have influenced the results.

Participant Demographics

Among the 2357 patients, 1133 underwent ACLR combined with ALLR and 1224 underwent ACLR only.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p<0.00001

Confidence Interval

1.44–2.46

Statistical Significance

p<0.00001

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1002/jeo2.70127

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication