PurposeTo assess the effects of anatomical double‐bundle (DB) versus single‐bundle (SB) for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in skeletally mature patients with ACL injuries. MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched from inception to February 7, 2022 were screened for randomized controlled trials. The Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Checklist was used to categorize studies as anatomic. A random‐effects meta‐analysis was conducted, with pooled results being summarized using mean difference (MD). Risk of Bias (RoB) was assessed using the RoB 2.0 tool. Certainty of evidence was rated using GRADE. ResultsA search of 1371 unique articles yielded eight eligible trials, representing 735 patients (360 DB, 375 SB) with mean (SD) age of 28.5 (2.86) years and follow‐up of 52.1 (36.2) months. Most trials had moderate to low RoB. Overall, DB was not significantly better than SB on Lysholm scores (MD = 0.52, 95% CI, − 1.80–2.85, p = 0.66; moderate certainty) or subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores (MD = − 0.40, 95% CI, − 4.35–3.55, p = 0.84; moderate certainty). Tegner scores were significantly higher in SB than DB in the intermediate term (MD = − 0.72, 95% CI, − 1.10 to − 0.34, p = 0.0002; high certainty), while significantly higher in DB relative to SB in the long‐term (MD = 0.52, 95% CI, 0.02–1.03, p = 0.04; high certainty). ConclusionDB ACL reconstruction significantly improves Tegner scores relative to SB ACL reconstruction over the long‐term (t ≥ 5 years). Intermediate term Tegner scores favour SB reconstruction. In both durations, there was no clinically significant difference based on the pre‐specified minimal clinically important difference of 1.0 point. There were also no significant differences in IKDC or Lysholm scores. Surgeons should consider anatomical DB ACL reconstruction as a result of long‐term improvement in patient‐reported outcomes. Level of evidenceI.