Schmitt, Laura C.

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.

Objectives: The ability of current return to sport (RTS) criteria to identify young, active patients after ACL reconstruction (ACLR) independently, at high risk for future ipsilateral or contralateral ACL injury is limited. The purpose of this study was to determine if meeting current, standard RTS criteria collectively, or in part, would identify young athletes at risk for an ipsilateral or contralateral ACL injury after primary ACLR and RTS. The tested hypothesis was the likelihood of an ipsilateral or contralateral 2nd ACL injury in the first 2 years after RTS would be the same in groups that successfully met or failed to meet all RTS criteria prior to RTS. The second hypothesis was that quadriceps femoris strength at the time of RTS would identify which limb was at greatest risk for future ACL injury. Methods: One hundred eighty-one patients (116 female) with a mean age of 16.7±2.9 years old underwent ACLR and were released to return to pivoting/cutting sports. These patients were enrolled in a prospective, observational cohort study, completed a RTS assessment and were tracked for occurrence of an ipsilateral graft tear or contralateral ACL injury after ACLR for 24 months. The RTS assessment included 6 tests: isometric quadriceps strength, 4 functional hop tests and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) patient reported outcome survey. Limb symmetry index (LSI) was calculated for strength and hop test assessments [(inv/uninv)*100]. Subjects were classified into groups that successfully passed all 6 RTS tests at a level of 90 compared to those that failed to meet all 6 criteria. Chi Square tests and Fisher Exact Tests were used to determine if successfully passing all 6 RTS measures resulted in a reduced risk of 2nd ACL injury in the first 24 months after RTS as well as to assess if ability to successfully pass individual RTS criteria resulted in reduced risk of 2nd ACL injury. Results: Thirty-nine (21.5%) patients suffered a 2nd ACL injury with 18 ipsilateral graft failures and 21 contralateral ACL tears in the first 24 months after RTS following ACLR. At the time of RTS, 57 patients (31.5%) achieved LSI values of 90% or greater on all testing as well as an IDKC value of 90 or greater. At this level, there was no difference in ipsilateral graft failures between patients who passed all RTS criteria (15.8%) and those who failed at least 1 criterion (7.3%; p=0.08). There was also no difference in contralateral ACL injuries between patients who passed all RTS criteria (7.0%) and those who failed at least 1 criterion (13.7%; p=0.22). When individual RTS criterion were evaluated, patients who failed to achieve 90% quadriceps strength LSI were 84% less likely to suffer an ipsilateral graft failure (OR=0.16; 95%CI: 0.04, 0.74;p=0.009), but 3 times more likely to suffer a contralateral ACL injury (OR=2.5; 95%CI:1.0, 6.5;p=0.05). Conclusion: Current criteria to evaluate readiness to return young athletes to pivoting and cutting sports, may not identify young, active patients independently at high risk for a future ipsilateral graft tear or contralateral ACL injury. Inability to achieve 90% LSI on an isometric quadriceps strength assessment resulted in a reduced risk of ipsilateral graft failure, but an increased risk in contralateral ACL injury after ACLR and RTS. Further investigation is needed on the relationship between quad strength and side of future ACL injury and whether other factors may help contribute to a predictive model of future ACL injury specific to limb.

Background: The impact of maturation on lower extremity strength and function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) may help guide future studies of age-specific rehabilitation. Hypothesis Pediatric ACLR patients would demonstrate higher thigh strength symmetry and knee-related function at return to sport (RTS) compared with adolescent and young adult participants who underwent traditional ACLR. Study Design: Prospective cohort study. Level of Evidence: Level 2. Methods: A total of 144 young athletes at the time of RTS clearance post-ACLR were classified into 3 maturational groups (pediatric, n = 16 with physeal-sparing ACLR [mean age = 12.3 years; range = 9.2-14.6 years]; adolescent, n = 113 [mean age = 16.5 years; range = 14.1-19.8 years]; young adult, n = 15 [mean age = 22.0 years; range = 20.5-24.9 years]). Quadriceps and hamstring strength were measured using an electromechanical dynamometer. Knee-related function was measured using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective form and single-leg hop tests. The Limb symmetry Index (LSI) was used in calculations for hop and strength tests. Group differences were compared with Kruskal-Wallis tests and Mann-Whitney U post hoc tests. Proportions of participants meeting literature-recommended RTS criterion cutoffs were compared among the groups using chi-square tests. Results: The pediatric group demonstrated higher quadriceps LSI ( P = 0.01), IKDC scores ( P < 0.01), single-hop LSI ( P < 0.01), and crossover-hop LSI ( P = 0.02) compared with the young adult group. In addition, the pediatric group demonstrated higher IKDC scores ( P < 0.01) and single-hop LSI ( P = 0.02) compared with the adolescent group. The adolescent group demonstrated higher IKDC scores ( P < 0.01), single-hop LSI ( P = 0.02), and crossover-hop LSI ( P = 0.03) compared with the young adult group. The proportions of participants meeting all RTS criterion cutoffs were highest in the pediatric group and lowest in the young adult group ( P = 0.03). Conclusion: Young athletes at RTS clearance after pediatric ACLR demonstrated higher quadriceps strength symmetry and knee-related function than adolescents and young adults after traditional ACLR. Clinical Relevance: These findings demonstrate the need for further study regarding the impact of these group differences on longitudinal outcomes after ACLR, including successful RTS and risk of second ACL injury.

Background: The association between quadriceps strength and functional outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a focus of current research, while evaluations of hamstring strength are limited, despite the frequent use of hamstring autografts. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between changes in quadriceps and hamstring strength symmetry and self-reported outcomes before ACLR and at 12 and 24 weeks after surgery. We hypothesized that improvements in quadriceps and hamstring strength symmetry would be correlated with improvements in self-reported outcome measures within the first 6 months after ACLR. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Thirty patients who underwent ACLR with a hamstring autograft were enrolled. Quadriceps and hamstring strength and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) values were assessed before and at 12 and 24 weeks after ACLR; limb symmetry indexes for strength were calculated at each time point. The Friedman and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to analyze changes in KOOS values over time. Spearman rank-order correlations were used to test the relationship between changes in strength and KOOS values between each time point. Results: Hamstring and quadriceps limb symmetry significantly increased with time ( P ≤ .03). Fair correlations were observed between changes in the hamstring index and changes in the KOOS Symptoms subscore from before surgery to 12 weeks postoperatively ( r = 0.48; P ≤ .05). Changes in the quadriceps index (QI) were moderately correlated with changes in the KOOS Sport/Recreation subscore ( r = 0.60; P = .001), and fair correlations were seen between the QI and the KOOS Quality of Life subscore ( r = 0.39; P ≤ .04) from preoperatively to 12 weeks after surgery. Moderate correlations were seen between the QI and the KOOS Sport/Recreation subscore ( r = 0.57; P = .005) from 12 to 24 weeks after surgery. Conclusion: Improvements in quadriceps and hamstring strength symmetry were modestly associated with improvements in athletes’ perceived function in the first 6 months after ACLR. Specifically, improvements in hamstring symmetry were associated with improvements in knee symptoms within the first 12 weeks postoperatively, while improvements in quadriceps symmetry were associated with improvements in self-reported sport function throughout the first 6 months after ACLR. The restoration of strength symmetry within the first 6 months may be a critical component of rehabilitation aimed at maximizing function after ACLR. Further investigation is warranted to comprehensively evaluate whether the timing of strength gains predicts future function, including those who successfully return to their preinjury activity level after ACLR.

Objectives: The incidence of 2nd anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury after ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and return to sport (RTS) ranges from 25%-33% in young, active populations; with the greatest risk in the first 12 months after RTS. Recent data indicate that failure to successfully meet traditional RTS criteria, inclusive of strength, functional hop testing and patient reported outcome scores, may identify athletes at increased risk of future injury after ACLR. However, these studies have focused on adult populations and it is unknown if similar RTS criteria apply to young, adolescent, pivoting/cutting athletes. The purpose of this study was to determine if meeting all current, standard RTS criteria would identify young athletes at risk for future ACL injury after primary ACLR and RTS. The tested hypothesis was the likelihood of 2 nd ACL injury in the first 2 years after RTS would be lower in patients who met all RTS criteria prior to initiation of pivoting and cutting activity compared to patients who failed to meet all RTS criteria prior to RTS. Methods: One hundred fifty-nine subjects (112 female, 47 male) with a mean age of 17.2±2.6 years old (range: 13-25 y.o.) underwent ACLR and were released to return to pivoting/cutting sport. These patients were enrolled in a prospective, observational cohort study, completed a RTS assessment and were then tracked for occurrence of 2 nd ACL after ACLR for 24 months. The RTS assessment included 6 tests: isometric quadriceps strength, 4 functional hop tests and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) patient reported outcome survey. Limb symmetry index (LSI) was calculated for strength and hop test assessments [(involved/uninvolved)*100]. The IKDC was reported on a 0-100 scale with 100 representing a perfect score. Subjects were classified into groups that successfully passed all 6 RTS tests at a level of 90 and again at 95 compared to those that failed to meet all 6 criteria. Chi Square tests were used to determine if successfully passing all 6 RTS measures at various levels of symmetry resulted in a reduced risk of 2 nd ACL injury in the first 24 months after RTS. Results: Thirty-five (22.0%) patients suffered a 2 nd ACL injury, with 26 occurring in the first 12 months after RTS. At the time of RTS, 42 patients (26%) achieved LSI values of 90 or greater on all testing as well as an IKDC value of 90 or greater. The remaining 117 subjects (74%) scored below 90 on at least 1 of the 6 assessments. At this level, there was no difference in 2 nd ACL injury prevalence between patients who passed all RTS criteria (12/42; 28.6%) and those who failed at least 1 criteria (23/117; 19.7%) (p=0.23). When the passing criteria was elevated to 95 on all RTS testing, only 15 subjects (9%) successfully passed all 6 tests. There was no significant difference in 2 nd ACL injury prevalence between patients who passed all RTS criteria (5/15; 33%) and those who failed at least 1 test (30/144; 20.8%) (p=0.32). Sub-group analysis which evaluated the group by graft type, also indicated no significant differences between groups (p>0.05). Conclusion: Current criteria to evaluate readiness to return young athletes to pivoting and cutting sports, using quadriceps strength symmetry, functional hop performance symmetry and patient reported outcomes, may not identify young, active patients at high risk for 2 nd ACL injury. Future work must identify more appropriate criteria to assess readiness to RTS in the young, athletic population and incorporate these findings into practice.