BackgroundAnterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) injuries are common in the active population of the Armed Forces. Symptomatic instability prompts individuals to seek a cure or a sheltered appointment. Despite the increasing numbers of ACL reconstructions performed, the outcomes have not been so spectacular with only a meager percentage of our patients returning to preinjury levels of activity. With the premise that an all-inside ACL reconstruction is likely to result in better functional outcomes, the aim of this study was to compare the short-term functional outcomes of a large consecutive series of patients undergoing ACL reconstruction using the translateral all-inside ACL reconstruction technique (AI) and standard anteromedial portal technique (AM) with a minimum follow-up of one year. MethodsA total of 240 patients with isolated ACL tear underwent ACL reconstruction via the AI or AM technique. Their preoperative and postoperative scores were compared to look for any significant differences in functional outcomes. ResultsThe two groups were matched for age, BMI, mechanism of injury, and interval from injury to surgery. There was no difference in their preoperative scores. Postoperatively, although there were significant improvements across both groups, there was no significant difference between the groups at any point of time. ConclusionThe AI technique has garnered interest in recent literature in addressing ACL injuries. This study found no discernible benefit of the AI technique when compared to the AM technique in terms of functionality following an ACL reconstruction at any point of time up to 1 year following surgery.