Introduction Anterior knee pain and sensitivity deficits are frequently present at medium and long term after an arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The objectives of this study are to, on a sports population, identify and compare its rate of occurrence, localization and temporal evolution using two different types of autografts: bone-patellar tendonbone versus semitendinosus-gracilis. Materials and methods Fifty male patients have been selected with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. In 50%, the autograft chosen was patellar tendon-bone. Anterior knee pain and sensitivity deficits have been clinically evaluated and subjective tests have been applied. Results At 2 weeks postoperative follow-up, anterior knee pain was less reported when semitendinosus-gracilis was used for harvesting (32% vs. 21.7%, P>0.05), and this group had less duration of pain complaints (P 0.05). Knee walking test was mainly positive with patellar tendonbone autograft (72% vs. 28%, P<0.05) and the Lysholm and IKDC-SKF scores were similar for both groups. Conclusion Anterior knee pain and sensitivity deficits are a reality after an anatomic arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, being important to understand that its presence is correlated with the kind of graft chosen. However, and on a sports population, these complaints were not associated with poor knee function. Introduction The importance of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) on the normal function of the knee is well established and recognized, especially in sports that require rotation1. Injuries of the ACL are common in the athletic population. The incidence rate has recently been reported to be between 36.9 and 60.9 per 100 person-years2. It is estimated in the United States that over 200,000 ACL injuries occur every year with a correspondingly high number of reconstruction performed3,4. In fact, anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLr) has become one of the most common procedures performed by orthopaedic surgeons today. Indications for primary ACLr include patients with symptomatic instability or those wishing to return to high-level ACL-dependent sport. ACLr goal is to create a replica of the original ACL, which due to its three-dimensional texture, is not possible. However, it is possible to do an approximate reconstruction, given the advances in biomechanics, the respect for the anatomy and isometry, a choice of graft more similar to the original ACL and a more friendly rehabilitation according to the ligamentization phases1. After the introduction of arthroscopy, the results in terms of restoring the laxity and return to sports activities have been generally satisfactory. However, complications do exist in relation to the kind of graft selected in the form of sensitivity deficits (SDs) and anterior knee pain (AKP), which are two of the actual major causes of donor-site problems after ACLr5–8. We hypothesized that altered sensation and pain are more extensive when compared to previous reports and may subjectively impact upon function on a sports population. We aimed to identify and compare the rate of occurrence, localization and temporal evolution of AKP and SD, as well as their consequences on the recuperation and functional outcomes on the first 2 years postoperative follow-up on patients with sports motivation. The patients have been submitted to an anatomic arthroscopic ACLr by the same surgeon, with two different types of autografts—bonepatellar tendon-bone (BTB) versus semitendinosus-gracilis (SG)—because, and according to our current knowledge, studies like this have never ever been reported, especially with this kind of population nor with the technique described. Materials and methods This work conforms to the values laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki (1964). The protocol of this study has been approved by the relevant ethical committee related to our institution in which it was performed. * Corresponding author Email: dr.jpoliveira@gmail.com 1 Av. Bissaya Barreto Praceta Prof. Mota Pinto, 3000-075, Coimbra, Portugal 2 Av. Bissaya Barreto Praceta Prof. Mota Pinto, 3000-075, Coimbra, Portugal 3 Rua da Trindade, 4000-541 Porto, Portugal