title: Anterior cruciate ligament tears: conservative or surgical treatment? A critical review of the literature.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Is it rational to recommend surgical reconstruction of the torn anterior cruciate ligament to every patient? Is conservative management still a valid option?
  
  
  METHODS
  Through a literature review, we looked for the arguments from each side and checked their validity.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Unfortunately results of most studies cannot be compared because of the following reasons not exhaustively cited: studied populations differed with respect to age, sex, professional and sports activity level, lesions associated with ACL rupture, patient recruitment methods, time from injury to treatment and different therapeutic modalities. Furthermore, various methods were used to evaluate the clinical and radiological results and there was no consensus of their interpretation. Some authors assumed that the incidence of further meniscus lesions could probably be reduced if the torn ACL was surgically reconstructed. But, we have no evidence to believe that this would be due to the surgical repair rather than to a decrease of involvement in strenuous activities. At present it is not demonstrated that ACL-plasty can prevent osteoarthritis. Numerous factors could explain evolution to arthrosis whatever the treatment for the ACL-ruptured knee. Studies comparing surgical and conservative treatments confirm that ACL reconstruction is not the pre-requisite for returning to sporting activities. More recent and scientifically well-designed studies demonstrate that conservative treatment could give satisfactory results for many patients. They suggest some methods to help them choose the best treatment.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  At present there are no evidence-based arguments to recommend a systematic surgical reconstruction to any patient who tore his ACL. Knee stability can be improved not only by surgery but also by neuromuscular rehabilitation. Whatever the treatment, fully normal knee kinematics are not restored. While the patients wish to go back to their sport and want everything possible done to prolong their ability to perform these activities, they should be informed that the risk of further knee lesions and osteoarthritis remains high, whatever the treatment, surgical or conservative.
  
  
  METHODS
  Systematic review of Level I, II, III and IV studies, Level IV.
authors.affiliation: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Saint-Pierre, 322 rue Haute, 1000, Bruxelles, Belgium. philippe_delince@stpierre-bru.be
authors.forename: Philippe
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Delincé
authors.forename: Dior
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Ghafil
mesh_terms: D016118:Anterior Cruciate Ligament / Q000601:surgery; D000070598:Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; D059549:Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; D001265:Athletic Injuries / Q000150:complications / Q000628:therapy; D003661:Decision Support Techniques; D006801:Humans; D007718:Knee Injuries / Q000150:complications / Q000601:surgery / Q000628:therapy*; D020370:Osteoarthritis, Knee / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control; D018579:Patient Selection; D011183:Postoperative Complications; D020127:Recovery of Function; D000070600:Tibial Meniscus Injuries