Abstract
Introduction:
ACL injuries from sports activities lead to substantial functional impairments and debates over optimal treatment (conservative vs. operative). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on IKDC score-based functional outcomes.
Objectives:
The aim of study is to review the management of ACL injuries.
Methods:
We identified relevant studies comparing ACL treatments, assessing IKDC-scored functional outcomes. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and quality assessment. Random-effects models pooled effect sizes, generating forest plots. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed.
Results:
Five studies met inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed no significant correlation between non-operative and operative approaches regarding IKDC-scored functional outcomes. Forest plots revealed no significant differences.
Conclusion:
This systematic review/meta-analysis indicates no significant difference in IKDC-scored functional outcomes between non-operative and operative ACL treatments. IKDC scores were found to be higher in the operative treatment group when the follow-up period extended beyond 10 years. Individualized decisions, considering patient preferences and risks, are crucial. Further research is needed to explore additional outcome influencers and refine treatment guidelines.