LaPrade, Robert F.

Abstract Acute, traumatic meniscus tears are common and should be repaired whenever possible. However, the biological age of the patient, along with the specific tear morphology, may significantly influence the selection of the repair technique, expected clinical outcomes and the postoperative rehabilitation protocol. Risk factors for failure of meniscus repair, such as ligament laxity, need to be addressed to improve the healing potential of the meniscus. Biologic augmentation strategies, including bone marrow stimulation, platelet‐rich plasma, fibrin clot, mesenchymal stem cells or meniscal wrapping, can be used to enhance healing and reduce failure of meniscus repair rates. However, the clinical evidence remains limited and of low quality. As such, the routine use of biologic augmentation in meniscus repair warrants critical evaluation. In patients with post‐meniscectomy syndrome, meniscus allograft transplantation (MAT) may be a viable option to reduce pain and joint degeneration and improve knee function. Meniscus implants provide alternatives to traditional MAT; however, their long‐term efficacy, chondroprotective effects and integration within the knee joint require further research. Meniscus reconstruction using tendon autografts has been described as an alternative treatment option in patients with meniscus loss. Emerging methods, such as gene therapy and repurposed drugs, demonstrate in vitro potential for advancing meniscal repair, although their clinical applications are still in their infancy. Future research is necessary to optimize meniscal repair techniques, enhance clinical efficacy, and ultimately, improve outcomes in patients. Level of Evidence Level V.

Purpose Part-two of this consensus aimed to provide recommendations for the prevention of meniscus injuries, non-operative treatment of acute tears and degenerative lesions, return to sports, and patient-reported outcome measures. Methods This consensus followed the European Society of Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology and Arthroscopy (ESSKA) formal consensus methodology. For this combined ESSKA- American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM) - American Academy of Sports Physical Therapy (AASPT) initiative, 67 experts from 14 countries, including orthopedic surgeons and physiotherapists, were involved. The 26 Steering Group members established guiding questions, screened the existing evidence, and proposed statements, and provided Grades of recommendations. The 41 Rating Group members assessed the statements according to a Likert scale (1-9). Final documents were assessed by an international peer review group for geographical adaptability. Results Low to moderate scientific level of evidence was available, so that grades of recommendations were low (three Grade A ratings, four Grade B, three Grade C and 13 Grade D), underlining the relevance of this consensus. One strong and 17 relative agreements with overall median of 8 (8-9) and a mean of 7.92 +/- 0.37 were achieved for 23 statements on 18 questions. Prevention of meniscus injuries is possible with general knee injury reduction programs and through avoidance of certain activities. Non-Operative treatment including physical therapy is the first line approach for degenerative meniscus lesions and may be an option for some acute tears. Return to sports after meniscus tear surgery should be both criterion-based and time-based. Patient reported outcomes in combination with performance-based measures are recommended to evaluate the rehabilitation process. Conclusion This international EU-US consensus established recommendations for prevention strategies, describes rehabilitation of non-operated patients and of patients after partial meniscectomy, meniscus repair and meniscus reconstruction, and establishes return to sport criteria. These updated and structured recommendations may be applied by surgeons and physiotherapists. Level of Evidence I, Formal Consensus.

Purpose: Part II of this consensus aimed to provide recommendations for the prevention of meniscus injuries, nonoperative treatment of acute tears and degenerative lesions, return to sports and patient-reported outcome measures. Methods: This consensus followed the European Society of Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology and Arthroscopy (ESSKA) formal consensus methodology. For this combined ESSKA—American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM)—American Academy of Sports Physical Therapy (AASPT) initiative, 67 experts from 14 countries, including orthopedic surgeons and physiotherapists, were involved. The 26 Steering Group members established guiding questions, screened the existing evidence, and proposed statements, and provided Grades of recommendations. The 41 Rating Group members assessed the statements according to a Likert scale (1–9). Final documents were assessed by an international peer review group for geographical adaptability. Results: Low to moderate scientific level of evidence was available, so that grades of recommendations were low (3 Grade A ratings, 4 Grade B, 3 Grade C and 13 Grade D), underlining the relevance of this consensus. One strong and 17 relative agreements with overall median of 8 (8–9) and a mean of 7.92 ± 0.37 were achieved for 23 statements on 18 questions. Prevention of meniscus injuries is possible with general knee injury reduction programs and through avoidance of certain activities. Non-operative treatment including physical therapy is the first line approach for degenerative meniscus lesions and may be an option for some acute tears. Return to sports after meniscus tear surgery should be both criterion-based and timebased. Patient reported outcomes in combination with performance-based measures are recommended to evaluate the rehabilitation process. Conclusion: This international EU–US consensus established recommendations for prevention strategies, describes rehabilitation of nonoperated patients and of patients after partial meniscectomy, meniscus repair and meniscus reconstruction, and establishes return to sport criteria. These updated and structured recommendations may be applied by surgeons and physiotherapists. Level of Evidence: Level I, consensus.

AbstractPurposePart two of this consensus aimed to provide recommendations for the prevention of meniscus injuries, non‐operative treatment of acute tears and degenerative lesions, return to sports and patient‐reported outcome measures.MethodsThis consensus followed the European Society of Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology and Arthroscopy (ESSKA) formal consensus methodology. For this combined ESSKA—American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM)—American Academy of Sports Physical Therapy (AASPT) initiative, 67 experts from 14 countries, including orthopedic surgeons and physiotherapists, were involved. The 26 Steering Group members established guiding questions, screened the existing evidence, and proposed statements, and provided Grades of recommendations. The 41 Rating Group members assessed the statements according to a Likert scale (1–9). Final documents were assessed by an international peer review group for geographical adaptability.ResultsLow to moderate scientific level of evidence was available, so that grades of recommendations were low (three Grade A ratings, four Grade B, three Grade C and 13 Grade D), underlining the relevance of this consensus. One strong and 17 relative agreements with overall median of 8 (8–9) and a mean of 7.92 ± 0.37 were achieved for 23 statements on 18 questions. Prevention of meniscus injuries is possible with general knee injury reduction programmes and through avoidance of certain activities. Non‐operative treatment including physical therapy is the first line approach for degenerative meniscus lesions and may be an option for some acute tears. Return to sports after meniscus tear surgery should be both criterion‐based and time‐based. Patient reported outcomes in combination with performance‐based measures are recommended to evaluate the rehabilitation process.ConclusionThis international EU–US consensus established recommendations for prevention strategies, describes rehabilitation of non‐operated patients and of patients after partial meniscectomy, meniscus repair and meniscus reconstruction, and establishes return to sport criteria. These updated and structured recommendations may be applied by surgeons and physiotherapists.Level of EvidenceLevel I, consensus.

Purpose The aim of part-one of this EU-US consensus was to combine literature research and expertise to provide recommendations for the usage of rehabilitation (including physical therapy) of patients undergoing surgical treatment for degenerative meniscus lesions or acute meniscus tears (including meniscectomy, repair, or reconstruction). Prevention programs, non-operative treatment of acute tears and degenerative lesions, return to sports and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) will be presented in a part-II article. Methods This consensus followed ESSKA “formal consensus” methodology. For this combined ESSKA (European Society for Sports Traumatology and Arthroscopy), AOSSM (American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine), ASSPT (American Academy of Sports Physical Therapy) initiative, 67 experts (26 in the steering group and 41 in the rating group) from 14 countries (USA and 13 European countries) including orthopedic surgeons, sports medicine doctors and physiotherapists were involved. Steering group members established guiding questions, searched the literature, proposed statements. Rating group members assessed the statements according to a Likert scale and provided grades of recommendations reaching final agreement about rehabilitation of the knee after meniscus surgery. Final documents were then assessed by a peer review group to adress the geographical adaptability. Results The overall level of evidence of the literature was low. Of the 19 questions (leading to 29 statements), one received a grade A of recommendation, two a grade B, nine a grade C and 17 a Grade D. Nevertheless, the mean median rating of all questions was 8.2/9 (9 being the highest rating on a scale of 1-9) and the global mean rating was 8.4+/-0.2, indicating a high agreement. Rehabilitation depends on the type of lesion, the treatment performed and is the same after medial or lateral meniscus surgery. Rehabilitation after meniscectomy should follow a criterion-based rehabilitation protocol, based on milestones rather than a time-based protocol. After meniscus repair and reconstruction, rehabilitation should be progressed according to both time and criterion-based milestones. Conclusion Rehabilitation after meniscus surgery is a debated topic that may influence surgical outcomes if not optimally performed. This international formal consensus established clear, updated, and structured recommendations for both surgeons and physiotherapists treating patients after meniscus surgery. Level of Evidence I, Consensus.

Abstract Purpose The aim of part one of this EU‐US consensus was to combine literature research and expertise to provide recommendations for the usage of rehabilitation (including physical therapy) of patients undergoing surgical treatment for degenerative meniscus lesions or acute meniscus tears (including meniscectomy, repair, or reconstruction). Prevention programmes, non‐operative treatment of acute tears and degenerative lesions, return to sports and patient‐reported outcome measures will be presented in a part II article. Methods This consensus followed the European Society for Sports Traumatology and Arthroscopy (ESSKA)'s ‘formal consensus’ methodology. For this combined ESSKA, American Orthopedic Society for Sports Medicine and American Academy of Sports Physical Therapy initiative, 67 experts (26 in the steering group and 41 in the rating group) from 14 countries (US and 13 European countries), including orthopaedic surgeons, sports medicine doctors and physiotherapists were involved. Steering group members established guiding questions, searched the literature and proposed statements. Rating group members assessed the statements according to a Likert scale and provided grades of recommendations, reaching a final agreement about rehabilitation of the knee after meniscus surgery. Final documents were then assessed by a peer review group to address the geographical adaptability. Results The overall level of evidence in the literature was low. Of the 19 questions (leading to 29 statements), 1 received a Grade A of recommendation, 2 a Grade B, 9 a Grade C and 17 a Grade D. Nevertheless, the mean median rating of all questions was 8.2/9 (9 being the highest rating on a scale of 1–9). The global mean rating was 8.4 ± 0.2, indicating a high agreement. Rehabilitation depends on the type of lesion, the treatment performed and is the same after medial or lateral meniscus surgery. Rehabilitation after meniscectomy should follow a criterion‐based rehabilitation protocol, based on milestones rather than a time‐based protocol. After meniscus repair and reconstruction, rehabilitation should be progressed according to both time and criterion‐based milestones. Conclusion Rehabilitation after meniscus surgery is a debated topic that may influence surgical outcomes if not optimally performed. This international formal consensus established clear, updated and structured recommendations for both surgeons and physiotherapists treating patients after meniscus surgery. Level of Evidence Level I, consensus.

Multiligament knee injuries (MLKIs) represent a broad spectrum of pathology with potentially devastating consequences. Currently, disagreement in the terminology, diagnosis and treatment of these injuries limits clinical care and research. This study aimed to develop consensus on the nomenclature, diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation strategies for patients with MLKI, while identifying important research priorities for further study. An international consensus process was conducted using validated Delphi methodology in line with British Journal of Sports Medicine guidelines. A multidisciplinary panel of 39 members from 14 countries, completed 3 rounds of online surveys exploring aspects of nomenclature, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation and future research priorities. Levels of agreement (LoA) with each statement were rated anonymously on a 5-point Likert scale, with experts encouraged to suggest modifications or additional statements. LoA for consensus in the final round were defined ‘a priori’ if >75% of respondents agreed and fewer than 10% disagreed, and dissenting viewpoints were recorded and discussed. After three Delphi rounds, 50 items (92.6%) reached consensus. Key statements that reached consensus within nomenclature included a clear definition for MLKI (LoA 97.4%) and the need for an updated MLKI classification system that classifies injury mechanism, extent of non-ligamentous structures injured and the presence or absence of dislocation. Within diagnosis, consensus was reached that there should be a low threshold for assessment with CT angiography for MLKI within a high-energy context and for certain injury patterns including bicruciate and PLC injuries (LoA 89.7%). The value of stress radiography or intraoperative fluoroscopy also reached consensus (LoA 89.7%). Within treatment, it was generally agreed that existing literature generally favours operative management of MLKI, particularly for young patients (LoA 100%), and that single-stage surgery should be performed whenever possible (LoA 92.3%). This consensus statement will facilitate clinical communication in MLKI, the care of these patients and future research within MLKI.

Objectives: The purpose of this study is to use standing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) stress radiographs to evaluate how posterior tibial slope (PTS) compared to anterior tibial translation (ATT) in an injured knee. A secondary purpose was to determine how posterior tibial slope (PTS) affects ATT side-to-side difference. Our hypothesis was that anterior tibial translation would be higher in the injured knee compared to the contralateral side and posterior tibial slope will have a positive effect on anterior tibial translation. Methods: A retrospective study of ACL stress radiographs was assessed from patients with primary ACL reconstructions with no concomitant ligamentous injury between January 2023 and August 2023. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained. The bilateral radiographs were long-leg lateral “stress views” which was accomplished by monopodal weight-bearing in 20° flexion and are a part of the initial patient workup. Stress radiographs were utilized to measure the anterior tibial translation (ATT) and posterior tibial slope (PTS) for both knees. Differences in ATT between knees and the correlation between PTS and ATT was assessed via paired t-tests and regression analysis. Results: A final cohort of 39 patients were analyzed using preoperative ACL stress radiographs. The results reported a significant regression with positive correlation between posterior tibial slope (PTS) and anterior tibial translation for the injured knee using both anatomic (Figure 1, P<0.001, R 2 =0.302) and mechanical (Figure 2, P=0.038, R 2 =0.111) PTS measurements. Anatomic PTS measurements are better at predicting ATT for the injured knee compared to mechanical PTS measurements. Conclusions: The findings of this study report a significant regression with a positive correlation between posterior tibial slope (PTS) and anterior tibial translation (ATT) of the injured knee, with anatomic PTS measurements being a better predictor of ATT than mechanical PTS measurements. This indicates an important relationship between PTS and ATT with higher PTRS predicting higher ATT.

Objectives: The purpose of this paper was to compare patient reported outcomes (PROMs) between isolated anterior cruciate ligament (ACLR) and ACLR with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs and compare PROMs between different medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repair techniques. Methods: All patients with isolated (ISO) ACL reconstruction or ACL reconstruction with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs with a minimum 2 years of follow-up were retrospectively evaluated. Institutional review board approval was obtained for this study. A final total of 42 ISO-ACL patients were matched based upon age, sex, and body mass index to 40 in the “terrible triad” (TT) cohorts. Outcome measures were obtained from 32 patients in the ISO cohort, and 38 patients in the TT cohort. The PROMs used for this study include the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee, Cincinnati, Tegner, Lysholm, Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12), and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS) questionnaire forms. T tests and chi-square goodness of fit tests were used to compare the above PROMs both pre- and postoperatively within each cohort, and between cohorts and rates of revision or reoperation. Results: The preoperative and postoperative PROMs between patients in the isolated cohort and the triad cohort demonstrated no significant differences, except for the Physical category of the VR-12, in which the triad cohort had significantly higher results (p = 0.04) (Figure 1). Both the isolated cohort and the triad cohort reported significant differences between pre- and postoperative PROMs within their own cohorts. When comparing methods of surgery, including all-inside vs. inside-out for the medial meniscus repairs and tunnel versus no-tunnel for the lateral meniscus root repairs, no significant differences were found between postoperative PROMs. Additionally, no significant difference was found in revision or reoperative rates between the triad and isolated cohorts (p = 0.374) (Figure 2), the all-inside versus inside-out medial meniscus cohorts (p = 0.267), or the tunnel vs. no-tunnel lateral meniscus cohorts (p = 0.781). Conclusions: There was no significant difference in PROMs between isolated ACLR versus ACLR with concomitant medial meniscus ramp and lateral meniscus root repairs. While the complexity of the TT ACLR patients was more involved, PROMs and healing rates were similar and performing concurrent medial ramp and lateral root repairs at the time of ACLR should be considered.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to radiographically assess changes in 1) patellar height, 2) anterior tibial translation (ATT), and 3) posterior tibial slope following supratubercle ACW-PTO and to compare changes in patellar height to a cohort of medial opening proximal tibial osteotomies (MOW-PTO). Methods: Patients who underwent supratubercle ACW-PTO by a single surgeon from July 2019-February 2023 were included. Institutional Review Board approval was obtained for this study. Radiographic assessment at four time points (preoperative, postoperative day 1, 3 months and 6 months) of patellar height (via the Caton Dechamps and Insall Salvati ratios), posterior tibial slope, and anterior tibial translation of the lateral tibial plateau relative to the lateral femoral condyle was completed. A comparison cohort of patients undergoing MOW-PTO was included for comparison of patellar height. Results: Patellar height averages ( n=16) after ACW-PTO using the Caton-Deschamps ratio (Figure 1) demonstrated a significant increase in patellar height on postoperative day 1 ( p=0.004), but were not significantly different at 3 and 6 months postoperatively (Table 2). Conversely, averages of patellar height after MOW-PTO ( n=28) demonstrated no difference on postoperative day 1, but then was significantly decreased by 6 months postoperatively ( p=0.005) (Table 1). There was a significant difference between the closing and opening-wedge cohorts when comparing the difference in patellar height using the CD ratio between preoperative and 6 months ( p=0.011). Anterior tibial translation in the ACW-PTO cohort was significantly decreased by an average of 9.0 mm from preoperative to postoperative values ( p<<0.001) (Figure 2). Posterior tibial slope in the ACW-PTO cohort was significantly decreased by an average of 11.8° from preoperative to postoperative values ( p<<0.001). Conclusions: Supratubercle ACW-PTO performed for ACL failure in the setting of increased tibial slope did not induce significant changes in patellar height postoperatively. Furthermore, following ACW-PTO there was a significant decrease in anterior tibial translation and posterior tibial slope.