Especially among athletes & active people, arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, or ACLR, is one of the most popular orthopedic operations carried out globally. After an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear, one of the most common knee injuries, the technique attempts to restore knee stability[1]. Patient outcomes have greatly improved as a result of improvements in surgical methods, rehabilitation regimens, & patient selection standards over time.

The surgical techniques, rehabilitation plans, & results based on a sample of 50 patients who had the surgery are the main topics of this article's discussion of current trends in ACLR. The goal is to shed light on patient recovery, the efficacy of contemporary ACLR procedures, & the major variables affecting the outcomes[2].

An important component of the knee, the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is necessary for both preserving joint stability & promoting physical activity. ACL injuries are common in sports & the general population, whether they result from acute trauma or long-term usage. They significantly limit function & raise the risk of osteoarthritis[3-5].

The surgical methods used for ACL restoration have changed significantly in recent years because to improvements in medical technology, a better understanding of knee biomechanics, & a growing focus on patient-centered outcomes. This study attempts to provide physicians & researchers with a current paradigm for strengthening ACL reconstruction protocols & improving patient quality of life by incorporating the expanding body of knowledge on surgical advances, graft selection, & rehabilitation results[6].

All the cases presented with anterior cruciate ligament injury attended orthopaedic OPD & emergency department were treated with arthroscopic anatomic ACL reconstruction using hamstring tendon graft were evaluated & followed up for functional outcome. About 50 patients underwent the ACL reconstruction surgery 06 months.

Inclusion criteria

Patients operated for ACL reconstruction surgery, both the genders above 18 years were included, patients and/or his/her legally acceptable representative willing to provide voluntary written informed consent for participation in the study.

Exclusion criteria

Immature skeleton, H/O previous operation on either knee, H/O concurrent fracture, other co-exiting significant injuries: posterior cruciate ligament, lateral collateral ligament etc, patients and/or his/her legally acceptable representative willing not to provide voluntary written informed consent for participation in the study.

Table 1: Patient Demographics

The graft type, surgical approach, & tunnel placement were standardized across all procedures. The results presented in the following tables summarize these details.

Table 2: Surgical Details

Postoperative outcomes were assessed at 6 months & 1 year following surgery. The results were evaluated based on functional recovery (measured using the International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] score), incidence of graft failure, & return to sports.

This refers to the type of tissue used for the graft in the surgery. The majority of the patients in this study or dataset received a hamstring tendon autograft (45 cases), which is commonly used for ACL reconstruction due to its benefits in recovery & strength. A smaller portion of patients had a patellar tendon autograft (05 cases, or 10%) which involves using donor tissue.

Table 3: Postoperative Functional Outcomes (6 Months & 1 Year)

A clear trend of improvement in functional outcomes over the 1-year period post-surgery. Patients experienced better knee function (IKDC scores), a higher percentage returned to sports, & a larger proportion regained full range of motion. Graft failure rates were low & decreased over time, demonstrating positive outcomes for most patients in this cohort.

Graft selection, rehabilitation techniques, psychological considerations, & long-term results on clinical success are some of the many facets that define the complicated terrain of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction & rehabilitation. When these components are combined, important insights that help maximize postoperative healing are revealed[7].

Functional Recovery: With a mean IKDC score of 78.3 six months after surgery, patients' knee function had somewhat improved. The mean IKDC score improved to 90.1 by the one-year mark, indicating a significant functional improvement for the patients[8]. According to this, most patients recover functional stability after a year after ACLR, indicating that most have a favorable outcome.

One key indicator of recovery is the capacity to resume athletic activities. 60% of athletes were able to resume their prior level of activity at six months, & by a year, that percentage had risen to 85%. This highlights how crucial a well-designed rehabilitation program is to maximizing recovery & guaranteeing a safe return to sports[9].

Only two (4%) & one (2%) failures were recorded at six months & one year, respectively, indicating a low incidence of graft failure. The need of a thorough recovery plan was highlighted by the fact that these failures were frequently linked to poor rehabilitation adherence or reinjury.

For a functional recovery, early knee range of motion restoration is essential. Ninety-five percent of patients had restored their complete range of motion at one year, up from 85% at six months. This demonstrates the effectiveness of contemporary rehabilitation techniques that prioritize early mobilization.

This is one of the most exciting prospects in ACLR. This includes using stem cells or platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to promote graft healing & increase results. Preliminary findings indicate a favorable effect on graft healing & recovery speed, despite the fact that study is still underway.

Advanced Imaging for Tunnel Placement: Intraoperative fluoroscopy & 3D navigation devices have significantly increased the accuracy of tunnel placement[10]. Better long-term results & a decreased chance of graft failure are linked to precise femoral & tibial tube insertion.

A more individualized strategy is being used as rehabilitation protocols change. Nowadays, rehabilitation programs are customized to maximize recovery time & lower the risk of re-injury based on individual parameters including age, activity level, & graft type[11-12].

Improved Graft Materials: There is increasing interest in the application of synthetic & improved biologic grafts. Research into alternate graft materials may provide benefits in terms of strength, healing time, & the risk of donor site morbidity, even though autografts are still the gold standard.

One of the most effective orthopedic treatments for knee instability brought on by an ACL injury is still arthroscopic ACLR. The majority of patients regain full function within a year thanks to improvements in surgical methods, graft selection, & therapy. To further increase the efficacy & efficiency of this method, future developments in ACLR are probably going to concentrate on biological upgrades, sophisticated imaging, & customized rehabilitation. Healthcare professionals can improve surgery & rehabilitation techniques & guarantee better functional recovery & fewer problems for patients with ACLR by adhering to the patterns described in this study.

1. Petersen, W., Bierke, S., Stöhr, A., Stoffels, T., & Häner, M. (2023). A systematic review of transphyseal acl reconstruction in children & adolescents: comparing the transtibial & independent femoral tunnel drilling techniques. Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40634-023-00577-0.
2. Guo, Z. & Liu, F. (2023). Progress in research on & classification of surgical methods of arthroscopic reconstruction of the acl & all using a shared tendon graft through the femoral tunnel. Frontiers in Surgery, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2023.1292530.
3. Laddha, M., Gowtam, S., & Jain, P. (2022). Single-tunnel double-bundle-like effect with footprint enhancing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy Techniques, 11(3), e307-e314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eats.2021.10.023.
4. Herzog M., Marshall S., Lund J., Pate V., Mack C., & Spang J. (2018). Trends in incidence of acl reconstruction & concomitant procedures among commercially insured individuals in the United States, 2002-2014. Sports Health a Multidisciplinary Approach, 10(6), 523-531. https://doi.org/10.1177/1941738118803616.
5. Tantuway V, Mustafa Johar SA, Patel V, Nagla A, Gupta R, Bhambani P. Assessment of foot print of femoral tunnel placement with commercially available off set guide in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction. Int J Res Orthop. 2017;3:43-9.
6. Prins M. The Lachman test is the most sensitive & the pivot shift the most specific test for the diagnosis of ACL rupture. Aust J Physiother. 2006;52(1):66.
7. Hing W, White S, Reid D, Marshall R. Validity of the McMurray’s Test & Modified Versions of the Test: A Systematic Literature Review. The Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy. 2009;17(1):22-35.
8. Miller RH III, Azar FM. Knee injuries. In: Canala ST, Beaty JH, editors. Campbell's Operative Orthopaedics. 11th ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2008: 2395-2575.
9. Purnell ML, Larson AI, Clancy W. Anterior cruciate ligament insertions on the tibia & femur & their relationships to critical bony landmarks using high-resolution volume-rendering computed tomography. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36:2083-90.
10. Siebold R, Ellert T, Metz S, Metz J. Tibial insertions of the anteromedial & posterolateral bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament: morphometry, arthroscopic landmarks, & orientation model for bone tunnel placement. Arthroscopy 2008;24:154-61.
11. Siebold R, Ellert T, Metz S, Metz J. Femoral insertions of the anteromedial & posterolateral bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament: morphometry & arthroscopic orientation models for double-bundle bone tunnel placement—a cadaver study. Arthroscopy. 2008;24:585-92.
12. Smith TO, Davies L, Hing CB. Early versus delayed surgery for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review & metaanalysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2010;18:304-11.