Comparative study of the clinical efficacy of all-inside and traditional techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

All-Inside Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Had Clinical Outcome Similar to the Transtibial Technique Except for Improved Side-to-Side Difference and Tegner Activity Scale: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes of the all-inside technique with the transtibial technique in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction based on available literature on this topic.

METHODS

According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist, we conducted a systematic search for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies. Our comprehensive search encompassed PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that compared the 2 techniques with a minimal 1-year follow-up. Two independent authors assessed RCTs using the risk of bias tool developed by the Cochrane Collaboration and evaluated the quality of cohort studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomized Comparative Trials. The subjective and objective outcomes, complications, and graft failure were obtained. R software was used to perform the analysis.

RESULTS

The present analysis enrolled 9 RCTs (n = 687) and 11 cohort studies (n = 910). After a minimal 1-year follow-up in RCTs, functional outcomes such as International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, Knee Society Score, and hop test were found to be similar between 2 techniques. The laxity outcomes, including the IKDC objective grade and pivot-shift test, were suggested to be comparable. There was a significant difference favoring the transtibial technique in terms of side-to-side difference (P = .04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.08-0.90). The pooled data from cohort studies indicated equivalent results in terms of IKDC subjective score, Lysholm score, side-to-side difference, IKDC objective grade, complications, and graft failure, with the exception of statistical difference in the Tegner activity scale (P = .03; 95% CI, -0.50 to -0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that there is no difference in most outcome scores between the all-inside and transtibial techniques for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. There are statistically significant differences in side-to-side difference and Tegner activity scale favoring the all-inside technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, meta-analysis of Level I to IV studies.

Editorial Commentary: All-Inside Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Produces Excellent Results: Adjustable Cortical Suspensory Fixation Provides Rigid Tibial Fixation for All Ages

All-inside anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is the most minimally invasive ACL reconstruction technique available. Systematic review and meta-analysis show equally excellent outcomes for all-inside ACL reconstruction as compared with full tibial tunnel ACL reconstruction. Advantages of the all-inside technique may include improved tibial side fixation, improved stability, less tunnel widening, improved cosmesis, and less postoperative pain. Interference screw fixation using a full tibial tunnel technique can be complicated by inferior proximal tibial bone density. All-inside ACL reconstruction preserves the integrity of the tibial cortex and lends itself to cortical suspension fixation. Given modern adjustable suspensory cortical fixation and excellent clinical outcomes, surgeons should consider all-inside ACL reconstruction as a primary ACL reconstruction technique.

The healing effect of the all inside technique is superior to the traditional technique in the reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament

Our main objective was to examine the curative effect of all inside technique and traditional technique in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. In our retrospective study at the First People's Hospital of Jiashan County, we analyzed 88 participants with ACL injuries (50 males, 38 females, average age 27 years). They were randomly divided into two groups: traditional ACL reconstruction (42 participants) and all inside ACL reconstruction (46 participants). We measured and recorded the Visual Analog Scores (VAS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm scores, operation time, graft diameter and length between the traditional technique group and all inside technique group. There were statistically significant differences in the Lysholm scores and IKDC scores between traditional and all inside technique groups. The all inside technique showed a higher efficacy and effective post-operative recovery with minimal pain and recurrent injuries. Our findings showed that the differences in gender, age, side of injury and operation time were not significant (p> 0.05). Follow-up was conducted at 6 months and 12 months post operations (mean, 7.5 ± 1.1 months). All inside technique minimizing tissue disruption, optimizing graft placement and facilitating early recovery have a significant impact on patient outcomes.