ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07318272Updated Aug 25, 2026

Clinical and Functional Outcomes After ACL Reconstruction Versus Primary Repair

An observational study in Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Tear, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Isokinetic Test, sponsored by Gazi University. Recruiting at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 18 Years to 40 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-25.

Sponsored by Gazi University · Observational

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Aug 2026; still recruiting 3 months later.
Study type
Observational
Model
Other
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
45
Ages
18 Years to 40 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is the primary structure responsible for controlling anterior-posterior translation and rotational stability of the knee joint. Although ACL reconstruction has long been considered the gold standard among surgical interventions following ACL injury, arthroscopic primary repair techniques have recently regained interest. With advances in minimally invasive surgical procedures, refined patient selection criteria, and improved rehabilitation strategies, the clinical effectiveness of primary repair is once again being re-evaluated. However, there remains a limited body of literature directly comparing the medium- to long-term effects of these two surgical techniques on neuromuscular performance, fatigue tolerance, and functional outcomes.

The aim of this study is to comparatively investigate postoperative muscle strength and endurance, isokinetic fatigue response, muscle oxygenation, proprioception, knee stability, postural control, and patient-reported outcome measures in individuals who have undergone ACL reconstruction or primary repair. Assessments will include low- and high-velocity tests performed on the Cybex Norm isokinetic dynamometer, a 33-repetition fatigue protocol at 300°/s, muscle oxygenation analysis using Train.Red NIRS, knee laxity measurement via the GNRB arthrometer, single-leg balance and landing evaluations using the KFORCE force platform, and subjective outcome measures (IKDC, ACL-RSI).

The findings of this study are expected to provide a more comprehensive understanding of how surgical technique influences physiological, biomechanical, and functional outcomes. This knowledge may contribute to the development of individualized rehabilitation approaches and evidence-based return-to-sport criteria.

Read the detailed description

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), one of the key stabilizers of the knee joint, plays a crucial role in maintaining both anteroposterior and rotational stability. The increasing popularity of recreational and competitive sports has contributed to a rising incidence of ACL injuries in recent years. Until the late 1980s, primary repair was widely accepted as the standard treatment for ACL injuries. Although short-term outcomes were generally satisfactory, this technique was largely abandoned due to high failure rates observed in medium- and long-term follow-ups. The probable causes of these unfavorable outcomes include suboptimal patient selection, invasive open repair techniques performed with absorbable sutures, and nonfunctional rehabilitation approaches characterized by prolonged cast immobilization. Considering the limited healing potential of the ligament, reconstruction surgery-performed using allografts or autologous tendon grafts-emerged as the new standard for the treatment of ACL injuries.

However, several disadvantages associated with reconstruction have raised the notion that a single surgical method may not be appropriate for all patients. These drawbacks include graft rerupture or contralateral ACL injury, loss of proprioception, physeal disturbances in pediatric populations, donor site morbidity in autografts or higher failure rates in allografts, the potential need for complex revision surgery, and the risk of early-onset osteoarthritis. In recent years, advances in patient selection criteria, minimally invasive surgical techniques, and modern rehabilitation protocols have renewed interest in arthroscopic primary ACL repair. This method preserves the native ligament and its proprioceptive properties while avoiding donor site morbidity, thereby offering the potential for a smoother and more accelerated postoperative rehabilitation process. Additionally, if primary repair fails, ACL reconstruction remains a viable subsequent treatment option. Primary repair has been described as a less morbid surgical alternative for patients presenting with acute proximal ACL tears, although high-quality evidence for its use is still limited.

Recent studies have shown improved success rates following primary repair of proximal ACL tears. In one investigation, researchers reported a 0% failure rate among 75 patients treated with primary ACL repair. Furthermore, 88% of patients demonstrated a negative pivot-shift test, 87% exhibited 0 or +1 Lachman test findings, and 89% successfully returned to sport. Similarly, numerous studies have evaluated the clinical effectiveness of ACL repair, and several recent systematic reviews have suggested that primary repair may be an effective treatment strategy with reasonable clinical outcomes compared to ACL reconstruction. Nonetheless, concerns remain that some evidence includes older cohorts that may not reflect contemporary surgical practices. A systematic review of only five comparative studies found no significant differences between treatments regarding clinical outcome scores, knee laxity, or graft rerupture rates. More recent randomized controlled trials have yielded conflicting results; some authors report that ACL repair provides non-inferior clinical outcomes compared to reconstruction, while others emphasize higher rates of adverse events and failure associated with repair. These issues underscore the need for further research comparing the medium- to long-term outcomes of ACL repair and ACL reconstruction.

Given the recent increase in clinical studies evaluating ACL repair versus reconstruction, synthesizing and expanding evidence from such research is critical for achieving a comprehensive and transparent understanding of the advantages, disadvantages, and clinical implications of both procedures.

The purpose of the present study is to compare postoperative clinical outcomes and patient-reported measures in individuals undergoing ACL reconstruction or primary ACL repair. Long-term outcomes of both procedures will be examined in terms of knee flexor and extensor muscle strength and endurance, torque-generating capacity and fatigue resistance, muscle oxygenation, knee joint proprioception, lower-extremity balance, and knee laxity. In this context, the findings of this study aim to provide valuable insights that may inform postoperative rehabilitation strategies and contribute to evidence-based clinical decision-making.

02

Conditions studied

  • Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Tear
  • Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction
  • Isokinetic Test

Keywords

  • ACL Injury
  • Anterior Cruciate Ligament
  • ACL Reconstruction
  • ACL Primary Repair
  • Postoperative Outcomes
  • Muscle Oxygenation
  • Isokinetic Testing
03

In context

Lacerations

174 studies on the registry are indexed under Lacerations; 43 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 45 is below the median of 100 across 37 observational studies indexed under Lacerations.

Browse Lacerations studies →

Lead sponsor

Gazi University is the lead sponsor of 551 studies on the registry; 102 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 40 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

The study will include a total of 45 participants. All participants will be adults aged 18-40 who meet the study's eligibility criteria, are able to comply with the assessment procedures, and provide informed consent.

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion Criteria for the ACL Reconstruction Group

  • Age 18-40 years
  • History of complete ACL rupture treated with ACL reconstruction
  • Surgery performed at Gazi University Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology
  • At least 12 months postoperative at the time of evaluation
  • Ability to comply with all study procedures
  • Signed

Exclusion Criteria for the ACL Reconstruction Group

  • Previous surgery for partial or chronic ACL tear
  • Concomitant multi-ligament knee injuries
  • Prior surgery on the ipsilateral or contralateral knee
  • Lower extremity malalignment (e.g., significant varus/valgus)
  • Tibial avulsion-type ACL injury
  • Neurological or musculoskeletal disorders affecting lower limb function
  • Any medical condition that may interfere with test performance or safety

Inclusion Criteria for the Primary ACL Repair Group

  • Age 18-40 years
  • Complete ACL rupture treated with arthroscopic primary ACL repair
  • Surgery performed at Gazi University Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology
  • Minimum 12 months postoperative at the time of assessment A-bility to follow and complete study procedures
  • Signed informed consent

Exclusion Criteria for the Primary ACL Repair Group

  • Previous surgery for partial or chronic ACL injury
  • Multi-ligament knee injuries
  • History of surgery on either knee
  • Lower extremity malalignment
  • Tibial avulsion-type ACL rupture
  • Neuromuscular or musculoskeletal diseases affecting lower limb function or balance
  • Any condition that may affect participation or compromise safety

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion Criteria for the Healthy Control Group

  • Age 18-40 years
  • No significant lower-extremity malalignment (e.g., varus/valgus deformity)
  • No history of lower-extremity injury within the past 12 months
  • No known chronic systemic disease
  • No history of knee surgery or diagnosed knee pathology
  • Ability to understand and comply with study procedures
  • Signed informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria for the Healthy Control Group

  • Presence of lower-extremity malalignment
  • Lower-extremity musculoskeletal injury within the last 12 months
  • Any chronic systemic or metabolic disease
  • History of knee injury, knee surgery, or diagnosed knee pathology
  • Neurological, vestibular, or musculoskeletal disorder affecting balance or gait
  • Inability to complete study procedures
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Clinically significant

Judged by the study doctor to matter for your health or for the study. It is a doctor’s decision, so ask the study team if you are unsure whether something counts.

05

Study design

Observational model
Other
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
45 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • ACL Reconstruction Group

    Demographic data, injury history, and surgical details will be recorded for all participants. The International Physical Activity Questionnaire, IKDC, and ACL-RSI scales will be administered. Assessments will be completed over two days. Isokinetic knee flexor/extensor strength, fatigue protocol, and H/Q ratios will be measured using the Cybex Norm dynamometer. Quadriceps and hamstring muscle oxygenation will be assessed with Train.Red NIRS. Knee proprioception will be evaluated via active joint repositioning, and postural control and dynamic stability will be measured using the KFORCE force platform. Knee laxity will be assessed with the GNRB arthrometer.

  • Primary ACL Repair Group

    Demographic data, injury history, and surgical details will be recorded for all participants. The International Physical Activity Questionnaire, IKDC, and ACL-RSI scales will be administered. Assessments will be completed over two days. Isokinetic knee flexor/extensor strength, fatigue protocol, and H/Q ratios will be measured using the Cybex Norm dynamometer. Quadriceps and hamstring muscle oxygenation will be assessed with Train.Red NIRS. Knee proprioception will be evaluated via active joint repositioning, and postural control and dynamic stability will be measured using the KFORCE force platform. Knee laxity will be assessed with the GNRB arthrometer.

  • Healthy Control Group

    Demographic data and physical activity levels will be recorded for healthy participants. All individuals will complete the International Physical Activity Questionnaire, IKDC, and ACL-RSI scales. Assessments will be conducted over two days. Knee flexor/extensor strength and H/Q ratios will be measured using the Cybex Norm isokinetic dynamometer. Quadriceps and hamstring muscle oxygenation will be assessed with the Train.Red NIRS device. Knee proprioception will be measured using an active joint repositioning test, while postural control and dynamic stability will be evaluated with the KFORCE force platform. Knee laxity will be assessed using the GNRB arthrometer.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Peak Torque (Isokinetic Strength)

    Peak torque of the knee flexor and extensor muscles will be measured using an isokinetic dynamometer (Cybex NORM® isokinetic dynamometer, Humac, CA, USA). Measurements will be performed in the following modes: concentric contraction at 60°/s, eccentric contraction at 60°/s, concentric contraction at 180°/s, and concentric contraction at 300°/s. Peak torque values will be recorded for each testing velocity and contraction mode and expressed in Newton-meters (Nm). Unit of Measure: Newton-meter (Nm)

    Time frame: First Day

  2. Extremity Symmetry Index (ESI)

    Extremity Symmetry Index will be calculated by comparing the involved and uninvolved limbs using peak torque values obtained from isokinetic testing. Unit of Measure: Percentage (%)

    Time frame: First day

  3. Conventional Hamstring-to-Quadriceps Ratio (H/Q Ratio)

    The conventional H/Q ratio will be calculated as the ratio of concentric hamstring peak torque to concentric quadriceps peak torque. Unit of Measure: Ratio

    Time frame: First day

  4. Functional Hamstring-to-Quadriceps Ratio

    The functional H/Q ratio will be calculated as the ratio of eccentric hamstring peak torque to concentric quadriceps peak torque. Unit of Measure: Ratio

    Time frame: First day

  5. Functional Range

    Functional range will be defined as the angular range in which at least 85% of peak torque is maintained during isokinetic testing. Unit of Measure: Percentage (%)

    Time frame: First Day

  6. Fatigue-Induced Peak Torque Decline

    Fatigue-related performance decline will be calculated as the percentage decrease in peak torque following a 33-repetition isokinetic fatigue protocol at 300°/s. Unit of Measure: Percentage (%)

    Time frame: First Day

  7. Muscle Oxygenation

    Muscle oxygenation will be assessed using the Train.Red FYER wireless near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) system (Train.Red, Gelderland, Netherlands). The device provides continuous, non-invasive measurements of tissue oxygen saturation (StO₂) and the oxy-deoxyhemoglobin difference (HbDiff). Sensors will be placed over the quadriceps and hamstring muscles following SENIAM guidelines. Muscle oxygenation will be recorded before and immediately after the isokinetic fatigue protocol to evaluate changes in local oxygen utilization and metabolic stress.

    Time frame: First Day

Secondary outcomes

  1. Knee Joint Proprioception

    Knee proprioception will be assessed using an active joint repositioning test performed on the Cybex NORM® isokinetic system (Humac, CA, USA). Participants will actively reproduce a target angle (30° knee flexion) starting from 90° flexion. Three trials will be recorded, and the absolute angular error will be calculated as the mean difference between the target angle and the reproduced angles. This measure reflects the accuracy of joint position sense and will be used to evaluate proprioceptive function.

    Time frame: First Day

  2. Single Leg Balance

    Postural control will be assessed using the KFORCE Plates force platform (Kinvent, Montpellier, France). Participants will perform a single-leg balance task, and Center of Pressure (CoP)-based variables such as mean CoP velocity, path length, sway area, and stabilization time will be recorded. Measurements will be obtained under standardized testing conditions for both limbs.

    Time frame: Second Day

  3. Single Leg Landing

    Dynamic stability will be assessed using the KFORCE Plates force platform. Participants will perform a single-leg landing task, and Center of Pressure (CoP)-based variables including stabilization time, CoP displacement, sway area, and CoP velocity will be analyzed. This measure evaluates the participant's ability to achieve stable posture following landing.

    Time frame: Second Day

  4. Knee Laxity

    Knee anterior laxity will be assessed using the GNRB® arthrometer at 20° of knee flexion. The primary outcome variable will be Anterior Tibial Translation (ATT) measured in millimeters under standardized forces (134 N and 200 N). The side-to-side difference in ATT and the slope value (stiffness index) will also be recorded to evaluate anterior cruciate ligament integrity. These parameters provide an objective and quantitative measure of ligamentous stability.

    Time frame: First Day

  5. IKDC Subjective Knee Evaluation

    The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form will be used to assess patient-reported knee symptoms, function, and sports activity levels. Scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better knee function and fewer symptoms. This measure provides a validated assessment of functional recovery following ACL surgery.

    Time frame: First Day

  6. ACL-RSI (Return to Sport Index)

    The Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI) scale will be administered to evaluate psychological readiness to return to sport. The 12-item scale assesses emotions, confidence, and risk appraisal related to returning to physical activity. Scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater psychological readiness. This measure allows comparison of psychological recovery after ACL reconstruction and primary repair.

    Time frame: First Day

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Hoogeslag RAG, Brouwer RW, Boer BC, de Vries AJ, Huis In 't Veld R. Acute Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rupture: Repair or Reconstruction? Two-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial. Am J Sports Med. 2019 Mar;47(3):567-577. doi: 10.1177/0363546519825878. PubMed 30822124 ↗
  • Szwedowski D, Paczesny L, Zabrzynski J, Gagat M, Domzalski M, Huri G, Widuchowski W. The Comparison of Clinical Result between Primary Repair of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament with Additional Internal Bracing and Anatomic Single Bundle Reconstruction-A Retrospective Study. J Clin Med. 2021 Aug 31;10(17):3948. doi: 10.3390/jcm10173948. PubMed 34501400 ↗
  • Kunze KN, Pareek A, Nwachukwu BU, Ranawat AS, Pearle AD, Kelly BT, Allen AA, Williams RJ 3rd. Clinical Results of Primary Repair Versus Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Contemporary Trials. Orthop J Sports Med. 2024 Jun 11;12(6):23259671241253591. doi: 10.1177/23259671241253591. eCollection 2024 Jun. PubMed 38867918 ↗
  • Vermeijden HD, van der List JP, O'Brien R, DiFelice GS. Patients Forget About Their Operated Knee More Following Arthroscopic Primary Repair of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Than Following Reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2020 Mar;36(3):797-804. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.09.041. Epub 2020 Jan 7. PubMed 31919026 ↗
  • Schneider KN, Schliemann B, Gosheger G, Theil C, Weller J, Buddhdev PK, Ahlbaumer G. Good to Excellent Functional Short-Term Outcome and Low Revision Rates Following Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair Using Suture Augmentation. J Clin Med. 2020 Sep 23;9(10):3068. doi: 10.3390/jcm9103068. PubMed 32977649 ↗
  • Duong JKH, Bolton C, Murphy GT, Fritsch BA. Anterior cruciate ligament repair versus reconstruction: A clinical, MRI and patient-reported outcome comparison. Knee. 2023 Dec;45:100-109. doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2023.09.008. Epub 2023 Nov 3. PubMed 37925800 ↗
  • Ciceklidag M, Kaya I, Ayanoglu T, Ayas IH, Ozer M, Ataoglu MB, Kanatli U. Proprioception After Primary Repair of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament. Am J Sports Med. 2024 Apr;52(5):1199-1208. doi: 10.1177/03635465241228839. Epub 2024 Mar 4. PubMed 38557260 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Aug 2026 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Jul 2027, 10 months after the start.

Of 20 observational studies under Lacerations, half reached primary completion within 25 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 12 and three quarters within 35. This study's planned 10 months is below that.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Dec 8, 2025
First posted
Jan 5, 2026
StartActual
Aug 4, 2026
Primary completionEst.
Jul 1, 2027
CompletionEst.
Nov 30, 2027
Last update
Aug 25, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 25, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07318272
Lead sponsor
Gazi University
Responsible party
Dudu Özdemir (PhD Candidate, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Gazi University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jan 5, 2026
Start date
Aug 4, 2026
Primary completion
Jul 1, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Nov 30, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Aug 25, 2026

Study contacts

Dudu Ozdemir Can, Msc
Contact
duduozdemir@gazi.edu.tr
90 5534448492
Nihan Karatas, Prof. Dr.
study director · Gazi University
Dudu Ozdemir Can, MSc
principal investigator · Gazi University

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion