outcomes, there was no statistically or clinically significant difference between the groups (pain P=.54, ext loss P=.75, flex loss P=.45) Pain (VAS). Despite an average drainage volume of 154 mls there was no difference in the grade of haemarthrosis or thigh circumference between the groups. There were no infections or wound dehiscence in either group. Two patients in each treatment arm had an aspiration for a persistent effusion during the eight week follow-up. Conclusions: There are no demonstrable benefits in the routine use of an intra-articular suction drain post ACL reconstruction. Given the cost and need for an additional patient visit for removal, it’s use is difficult to justify.