Milbrandt, Todd

Purpose To report the rate of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft failure by physis status (open, closing, closed) and to analyze which factors were associated with higher risk of ACL graft failure. Methods Patients younger than 18 years who underwent transphyseal ACL reconstruction (ACLR) between 2000 and 2018 at a single institution were reviewed at minimum 2 years after ACLR. Patient records were reviewed for anthropometrics, surgical techniques, and ACL graft failure. Patients were subsequently stratified based on physis status (open, closing, closed) and analyzed. Results A total of 272 patients (mean age of 15.4 ± 1.3 years) were assessed. The transtibial technique was used in 63.6% of cases. A hamstring autograft was used exclusively in the open physis group. A patellar tendon autograft was used in 65.9% of patients with a closing physis and 80.9% of patients with a closed physis. The overall graft failure rate was 13.2%, with a contralateral ACL injury rate of 11.0%. Kaplan‐Maier analysis by physis status showed different injury free from ACL reinjury ( P < .001). An open physis was associated with increased risk of ACL reinjury (hazard ratio, 5.2; P < .001) when compared to a closed physis. A closing physis presented a higher hazard ratio but was not statistically significant (hazard ratio, 2.6; P = .08). Hamstring graft type ( P = .03) and lower graft diameter ( P = .04) were significantly related to higher ACL reinjury after adjusting for physis status. Conclusions Transphyseal ACLR is a safe procedure in pediatric patients. The rate of reinjury was 13.2%. This rate decreases with skeletal maturity, use of patellar tendon autograft, and a larger graft diameter. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Background/Objective: To share technical pearls of a basic knee arthroscopy in a pediatric patient by presenting tips and tricks used by experienced pediatric arthroscopists. Indications: Knee arthroscopy is a common procedure performed by most orthopedic surgeons. However, technical considerations and equipment should be considered before performing this procedure in a pediatric patient. This video provides information on indications, equipment, and patient positioning, as well as outlining a systematic approach to diagnostic arthroscopy and pertinent pediatric anatomy. Discussion/Conclusion: This video provides an excellent overview as well as specific pathology-dependent considerations for the inexperienced orthopedic surgeon, or the orthopedic surgeon who rarely performs knee arthroscopy. Patient Consent Disclosure Statement: The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication.

Background: Dynamic supination is a well-recognized cause of congenital clubfoot deformity relapse. However, there is no consensus on how to diagnose it and there are varied approaches in its management. This study aims to define dynamic supination and indications for treatment by presenting consensus from an international panel of experts using a modified Delphi panel approach. Methods: An international panel of 15 pediatric orthopaedic surgeons with clinical and research expertise in childhood foot disorders participated in a modified Delphi panel on dynamic supination in congenital clubfoot. Panelists voted on 51 statements using a 4-point Likert scale on dynamic supination, clinical indications for treatment, operative techniques, and postoperative casting and bracing. All panelists participated in 2 voting rounds with an interim meeting for discussion. Responses were classified as unanimous consensus (100%), consensus (80% or above), near-consensus (70% to 79%), and indeterminate (69% or less). Results: Consensus was achieved for 34 of 51 statements. Panelists agreed dynamic supination is present when the forefoot is supinated during swing phase of gait with initial contact on the lateral border of the foot. There was also agreement that dynamic supination results from muscle imbalance between the tibialis anterior and the peroneus longus and brevis. There was no consensus on observation of hindfoot varus in dynamic supination, operative indications for posterior release of the ankle joint, or incisional approach for tibialis anterior tendon transfer. Reference to the calcaneopedal unit concept, planes of movement, and phases of gait were deemed important factors for consideration when evaluating dynamic supination. Conclusions: Consensus statements from the Delphi panel can guide diagnosis and treatment of dynamic supination in clubfoot deformity relapse, including clinical decision making regarding preoperative casting, surgical approach, and postoperative immobilization. Near-consensus and indeterminate statements may be used to direct future areas of investigation. Level of Evidence: Level V.

Background: Idiopathic clubfoot treatment is treated by manipulation and casting utilizing the Ponseti technique which can make the infant fussy and irritable. The goal of this study was to determine which intervention could decrease this pain response in infants undergoing Ponseti casting for idiopathic clubfeet. Our hypothesis was that the administration of oral sucrose solution or milk would be the most effective in accomplishing that goal. Methods: We conducted a double-blinded randomized controlled trial at a tertiary pediatric orthopaedic center on 33 children (average age=17.94 d; SD=20.51 d) undergoing clubfoot manipulation and casting and their guardians. Each cast was considered a new event and was randomized to an oral 20% sucrose solution (S), water (W), or milk (M) in a bottle (breast or nonbreast). We assessed the Neonatal Infant Pain Scale (NIPS), heart rate, and oxygen saturation before, during, and after the casting. Results: A total of 131 casts were randomized and 118 analyzed (37 M, 42 S, 39 W). Each child underwent an average of 3.97 casts (SD=1.74). There were no significant differences seen between the groups before casting in their mean NIPS score (M=2.2; SD=2.38, S=1.84, SD=2.18, W=1.61, SD=2.12). However during casting, mean NIPS score for both milk, 0.91 (SD=1.26, P=0.0005) and sucrose, 0.64 (SD=1.27, P<0.0001) were significantly less than water, 2.27 (SD=2.03) but not different from each other (P=0.33). Postcasting, the sucrose NIPS score, 0.69 (SD=1.53) continued to be significantly less than milk, 2.11 (SD=2.37, P=0.0065. There was no correlation between heart rate or oxygen saturation and NIPS. Conclusions: Sucrose solution and milk during Ponseti casting and manipulation were effective in decreasing the pain response in children undergoing manipulation and casting for clubfeet. The sucrose solution administration continued the pain relief into the postcasting period. In addition to the benefits of improving the patient experience during casting, a less irritable child may result in better casting. Level of Evidence: Level 1 evidence.