Background: In the recent decade, there has been substantial progress in the technologies and philosophies associated with diagnosing and treating anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries in China. The therapeutic efficacy of ACL reconstruction in re-establishing the stability of the knee joint has garnered widespread acknowledgment. However, the path toward standardizing diagnostic and treatment protocols remains to be further developed and refined. Objective: In this context, the Chinese Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons (CAOS) and the Chinese Society of Sports Medicine (CSSM) collaboratively developed an expert consensus on diagnosing and treating ACL injury, aiming to enhance medical quality through refining professional standards. Methods: The consensus drafting team invited experts across the Greater China region, including the mainland, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan, to formulate and review the consensus using a modified Delphi method as a standardization approach. As members of the CSSM Lower Limb Study Group and the CAOS Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine Study Group, invited experts concentrated on two pivotal issues: " Graft Selection" " and " Clinical Outcome Evaluation" " during the second part of the consensus development. Results: This focused discussion ultimately led to a strong consensus on nine specific consensus terms. Conclusion: The consensus clearly states that ACL reconstruction has no definitive " gold standard" " graft choice. Autografts have advantages in healing capability but are limited in availability and have potential donor site morbidities; allografts reduce surgical trauma but incur additional costs, and there are concerns about slow healing, quality control issues, and a higher failure rate in young athletes; synthetic ligaments allow for early rehabilitation and fast return to sport, but the surgery is technically demanding and incurs additional costs. When choosing a graft, one should comprehensively consider the graft's ' s characteristics, the doctor's ' s technical ability, and the patient's ' s needs. When evaluating clinical outcomes, it is essential to ensure an adequate sample size and follow-up rate, and the research should include patient subjective scoring, joint function and stability, complications, surgical failure, and the return to sport results. Medium and long-term follow-ups should not overlook the assessment of knee osteoarthritis.