1Júlio Elias Calheiros; 4Gabriel Urquiza Carvalho; 1Délio Tiago Martins Malaquias; 1Keysi Dayane Alves da Silva, 1Victor Rodrigues de Paula; 1Guilherme Guissone Martins; 3Isabela Marini Ferreira; 1Pedro Antonio Teixeira Nunes; 5Rubens Rodrigues Tudela; 1José Carlos Ferreira da Silva; 1Willians dos Santos Rocha; 3Pedro Henrique da Silva Bernardo; 4João Victor da Silva Bernardo; 1Leonardo Tomé da Silva; 1Felipe Gomes Lacerda; 1Carlos Augusto de Souza Silva; 2Ana Luiza Zampar Quintana Gomes; 1Lorena Passos Viana; 2Gabriel Gurgel Lago; 6Mariane Capeletti Alkamin; 7Bruna Estefani Rocha de Brito; 1,8Thiago Augusto Rochetti Bezerra
1 Medical student. University of Ribeirão Preto – UNAERP – Guarujá Campus, São Paulo, Brazil.
2Medical student. Professor Edson Antonio Velano University – UNIFENAS – Alfenas. Minas Gerais, Brazil.
3Medical student at the Nove de Julho University – UNINOVE – São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
4Medical student. Nove de Julho University – UNINOVE – São Bernardo do Campo, São Paulo, Brazil.
5Medical student. São Judas Tadeu University – Cubatão – São Paulo, Brazil.
6Medical student. São Leopoldo Mandic – Campinas – São Paulo, Brazil.
7Medical student. University Center Univértix- Matipó-Minas Gerais, Brazil.
8PhD in Orthopedics, Traumatology and Rehabilitation of the Locomotor System. Ribeirão Preto Medical School. University of São Paulo – USP. Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.
ABSTRACT:
This systematic review addresses the evolution of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rehabilitation approaches, comparing traditional and modern methods. Conventional approaches are based on rigid protocols and predetermined phases, which can limit the individualized recovery of patients. In contrast, modern protocols emphasize functional criteria, allowing for adaptive progression according to each patient’s physiological and biomechanical response. Neuromuscular training has emerged as an essential tool in ACL rehabilitation, contributing to improved proprioception, balance and dynamic stability of the knee. The use of advanced technologies, such as inertial sensors, bi feedback and computerized biomechanical analysis, has allowed for a more precise and efficient approach to monitoring recovery. Another fundamental aspect of modern rehabilitation is the consideration of psychological factors, such as fear of re-injury, which can negatively impact the patient’s confidence and performance. Strategies such as the use of the ACL-RSI scale have been incorporated to assess and strengthen the mental component during recovery. The decision on whether to return to sport should be based on multiple criteria, including muscle strength, symmetry of movement, resistance to fatigue and joint stability. Studies indicate that athletes who return before 9 to 12 months have a significantly higher risk of injury recurrence, highlighting the importance of careful and individualized planning. In conclusion, ACL rehabilitation is constantly evolving, and the adoption of approaches based on functional criteria, psychological support and technological innovation has shown better clinical outcomes and lower recurrence rates. Professional training and greater access to these technologies are essential to optimize results and ensure effective patient recovery.
KEYWORDS :
ACL rehabilitation, recovery protocols, neuromuscular training, biomechanics, return to sport, technological innovation.
REFERENCES :
1) ARDERN, C. L.; TAYLOR, N. F.; FELLER, J. A.; WEBSTER, K. E. Fifty-five per cent return to competitive sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine, v. 48, n. 21, p. 1543-1552, 2018.
2) BEZERRA, T. A. R. et al. Mechanism of injury, surgical methods and rehabilitation of the anterior cruciate ligament. Revista CPAQV-Centro de Pesquisas Avançadas em Qualidade de Vida, v. 14, n. 3, 2022.
3) BUCKTHORPE, M.; LA ROSA, G.; DELLA VILLA, F. Restoring knee extensor strength after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A clinical commentary. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, v. 14, n. 1, p. 159-172, 2019.
4) DELLA VILLA, F.; BOLDRINI, L.; RICCI, M.; et al. Return to sport after ACL reconstruction: A new evidence-based rehabilitation protocol. Sports Health, v. 12, n. 6, p. 574-582, 2020.
5) FILBAY, S. R.; GRINDEM, H.; ROOS, E. M. Osteoarthritis risk after ACL injury and reconstruction: Who, when, how, and why? British Journal of Sports Medicine, v. 53, n. 18, p. 1162-1173, 2019.
6) GRINDEM, H.; SNYDER-MACKLER, L.; MOKSNES, H.; ENGEBRETSEN, L.; RISBERG, M. A. Simple decision rules can reduce reinjury risk after ACL reconstruction: The Delaware-Oslo ACL cohort study. British Journal of Sports Medicine, v. 50, n. 13, p. 804-808, 2016.
7) GOKELER, A.; DINGENEN, B.; HEWETT, T. E.; et al. Prevention and rehabilitation of ACL injuries: A control-chaos continuum. Sports Medicine, v. 51, n. 3, p. 653-675, 2021.
8) HIGGINS, J. P. T.; ALTMAN, D. G.; GØTZSCHE, P. C.; et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. BMJ, v. 343, p. d5928, 2011.
9) LEPLEY, L. K.; PALMIERI-SMITH, R. M. Mechanisms behind neuromuscular training improving knee function after ACL reconstruction. Journal of Athletic Training, v. 55, n. 6, p. 603-615, 2020.
10) LOGERSTEDT, D.; ARUNDALE, A.; LYNCH, A.; et al. A conceptual framework for a sports knee injury performance profile. Sports Medicine, v. 48, n. 5, p. 1097-1108, 2018.
11) MITTERNACHT, J.; HERMANN, A.; CARQUEVILLE, P. Acquisition of Lower-Limb Motion Characteristics with a Single Inertial Measurement Unit-Validation for Use in Physiotherapy. Diagnostics, Basel, v. 12, n. 7, p. 1640, 2022.
12) PAPADOPOULOS, A.; STASINOPOULOS, D.; NIKOLAOU, V. Neuromuscular training in ACL rehabilitation. Journal of Orthopaedic Research, v. 39, n. 9, p. 1908-1917, 2021.
13) PATERNO, M. V.; RAUH, M. J.; SCHMITT, L. C.; FORD, K. R.; HEWETT, T. E. Incidence of second ACL injuries 2 years after primary ACL reconstruction. American Journal of Sports Medicine, v. 46, n. 7, p. 1465-1472, 2018.
14) PAGE, M. J.; MCKENZIE, J. E.; BOSSUYT, P. M.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, v. 372, p. n71, 2021.
15) SMITH, John. Advances in orthopedic surgery. Orthopedic Reviews, [s.l.], v. 12, n. 3, 2024.
16) SHEA, B. J.; REEVES, B. C.; WELLS, G.; et al. AMSTAR 2: A critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomized or non-randomized studies of healthcare interventions. BMJ, v. 358, p. j4008, 2017.
17) SNYDER-MACKLER, L.; AXE, M. J.; BUCHANAN, T. S.; WILLIAMS, G. N. Neuromuscular adaptations following ACL injury. Journal of Athletic Training, v. 55, n. 4, p. 400-411, 2020.
18) VAN MELICK, N.; VAN CINGEL, R. E.; BROOIJMANS, F.; et al. Evidence-based rehabilitation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, v. 24, n. 8, p. 1880-1898, 2016.
19) WELLS, G.; SHEA, B.; O’CONNELL, D.; et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 2014.
20) WILLY, R. W.; MEARDON, S. A.; SCHMIDT, A.; et al. Biomechanical predictors of ACL re-injury: Implications for prevention and rehabilitation. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, v. 49, n. 8, p. 579-587, 2019.
21) ZHU, A.; GAO, S.; CEN, X.; LI, W.; SONG, Y.; GAO, Z.; SUN, D. The Effects of Brace Stiffness on Knee Joints During Pull-Up Jump Shot Movements in Amateur Female Basketball Players. Applied Sciences, Basel, v. 15, n. 3, p. 1448, 2025.
