Table 7.

Summary of reviewed studies on KT.

Author	Balki et al. (2016) [30] RCT	Laborie et al. (2015) [31] CT	Labianca et al. 2022 [32] RCT
Method of randomization	Randomization table	No randomization	Online randomizer tool
Study population	N = 30; Experimental group N = 15 (15M; aged 22–37; mean age 28.60 ± 4.50), Control group N = 15 (15M; aged 18–39; mean age 27.66 ± 7.45).	N = 57 (44M, 13F); Experimental group N = 28 (21M, 7F; mean age 29.2 ± 8.6); Control group N = 29 (23M, 6F; mean age 32.6 ± 9.1)	N = 52 (M; aged 18–45); Experimental group N = 26 (26M; mean age 28.5 ± 5.3); Control group N = 26 (26M; mean age 29.2 ± 4.6)
ACLR method	Hamstring tendon autograft and tibialis posterior or peroneus longus allograft.	Hamstring tendon graft	Gracilis and semitendinosus tendon autograft
Enrollment time	4th day postoperatively	Immediately postoperatively	2nd day postoperatively
Intervention	2 muscle and lymphatic KT techniques every 5 days during a 10-day period plus 6 week rehabilitation program vs. 2 placebo KT techniques every 5 days during a 10-day period plus 6 week rehabilitation program	3 days of muscle/lymphatic KT technique plus anesthesia-analgesia protocol vs. 3 days of anesthesia-analgesia protocol	Muscle and lymphatic KT application every 5 days for 4 weeks plus standard 4 week rehabilitation program vs. standard 4 week rehabilitation program
Outcome measures	On 4th day (baseline; before KT application) and after 5 and 10 days after KT application: Pain (VAS); swelling (circumferences; tailor’s tape); ROM of knee flexion and extension (goniometer); hamstring and quadriceps strength (dynamometer). Follow up after 1 and 3 months: subjective functions (modified Cincinnati (30-point), Lysholm and Tegner tests).	At baseline (in the evening and at night) and on days: 1, 2, 3 after KT application: knee pain intensity (VAS); analgesia intake, awakening due to pain, postoperative discomfort, allergic reaction to KT, overall patient satisfaction (online self-assessment survey).	At the end of 2nd and 4th postoperative weeks: pain (VAS scale), edema (girth; measured at the mid patella), muscle mass (thigh circumference; measured 10 cm above the upper edge of the patella), passive knee ROM and knee function (Tegner-Lysholm Knee Scale and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS))
Main outcomes	Significant improvements in experimental vs. control group in knee swelling, pain and hamstring muscle strength (6.33 ± 1.54 vs. 5.13 ± 1.40) on the 5th day (p < 0.05); in knee flexion ROM (76.80 ± 14.85 vs. 60.13 ± 8.79), night pain, knee swelling and hamstring muscle strength (9.86 ± 2.32 vs. 7.53 ± 2.16) on the 10th day (p < 0.05) No significant improvement in experimental vs. control group in knee function, extension and extensor muscle strength (p > 0.05).	No significant difference in experimental vs. control group for knee pain intensity, evolution of pain and overall satisfaction (p > 0.05).	Significant improvement in experimental vs. control group in pain intensity at week 2 (3.2 ± 1.6 vs. 4.7 ± 1.9; p = 0.029) and edema reduction at week 2 (−6.0 ± 2.2 vs. −0.75 ± 0.5; p = 0.007) and week 4 (−7.6 ± 2.9 vs. −2.75 ± 1.4; p = 0.006). No significant improvement in experimental vs. control group in thigh circumference, ROM recovery, and knee function (p > 0.05)