All-inside versus complete tibial tunnel techniques in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract Background All-inside anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a novel technique that has gained attention due to its minimally invasive. However, evidence surrounding the efficacy and safety between all-inside and complete tibial tunnel ACLR are lacking. Present work was aimed to compare clinical outcome for ACLR performed with an all-inside versus a complete tibial tunnel technique. Methods Systematic searches were conducted of published literature on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for studies according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines up to May 10, 2022. The outcomes included KT-1000 arthrometer ligament laxity test, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, and Knee Society Score (KSS) Scale, and tibial tunnel widening. Complications of interest extracted were graft re-ruptures and evaluated the graft re-rupture rate. Data from published RCTs meeting inclusion criteria were extracted and analyzed, and all the extracted data are pooled and analyzed by RevMan 5.3. Results A total of 8 randomized controlled trials involving 544 patients (consisting of 272 all-inside and 272 complete tibial tunnel patients) were included in the meta-analysis. We found clinical outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] subjective score: mean difference [MD], 2.22; 95% CI, 0.23–4.22; p = 0.03; Lysholm score: MD, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.25–1.93; p = 0.01; Tegner activity scale: MD, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.11–0.71; p < 0.01; Tibial Tunnel Widening: MD = − 1.92; 95% CI, − 3.58 to − 0.25; p = 0.02; knee laxity: MD = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.12–1.20; p = 0.02; and graft re-rupture rate: RR, 1.97;95% CI, 0.50–7.74; P = 0.33) in the all-inside and complete tibial tunnel group. The findings also indicated that all-inside may be more advantageous in tibial tunnel healing. Conclusion Our meta-analysis indicated that the all-inside ACLR was superior to complete tibial tunnel ACLR in functional outcomes and tibial tunnel widening. However, the all-inside ACLR was not entirely superior to complete tibial tunnel ACLR in knee laxity measured, and graft re-rupture rate.