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 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 compared to ACLR alone.
  • Patients who underwent ACLR with ALLR had a greater incidence of returning to competition.
  • The Tegner score and ACL‐RSI scores were similar between the two groups.

Takeaway

This study found that more people can go back to playing sports if they have a special surgery that combines two procedures on their knee.

Methodology

The study involved a systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 studies comparing outcomes of ACLR with and without ALLR.

Potential Biases

The heterogeneity of study designs and patient demographics may introduce bias.

Limitations

The study included a limited number of studies with varying designs and potential biases due to non-randomized studies.

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

95% CI, 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