Stuart, Michael J.

Abstract A recent randomized trial from the Finnish Degenerative Meniscal Lesion Study Group was published in the New England Journal of Medicine and attempted to determine the efficacy of partial meniscectomy without osteoarthritis. Patients were randomized to either arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or sham surgery. The authors concluded that the clinical outcomes after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy were no better than those after the sham surgical procedure. However, there are several important limitations of this trial that make it difficult to generalize to the 700,000 arthroscopic partial meniscectomies performed in the United States each year. In this small sample of 146 patients, patients with traumatic meniscal tears and locking symptoms—those most likely to benefit from a partial meniscectomy—were excluded. In addition, although patients with radiographic arthritis were excluded, most of the patients in the study had degenerative changes at the time of arthroscopy. Therefore it is difficult to determine whether the patients were symptomatic from their chondral degeneration or their degenerative meniscal tear. In our opinion this study does not change the role of surgery in current clinical practice. The primary indication for arthroscopic partial meniscectomy remains symptoms of well‐localized joint line pain with acute onset and mechanical symptoms such as catching or locking that have failed comprehensive nonoperative management.

AbstractPurposeTo identify patient concomitant injury and surgical characteristics associated with 6‐month excellent functional and isokinetic testing results following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction.MethodsPatients that underwent ACL reconstruction by a single surgeon had isokinetic and functional testing performed with excellent 6‐month outcome defined as greater than 85 % in isokinetic strength and 90 % in functional tests (excellent 6‐month group vs. delayed 6‐month group). Patient concomitant injury and surgical factors were then analysed in univariate and multivariate statistical models to assess which characteristics predicted the excellent 6‐month group.ResultsThe 224 patients included 93 males and 131 females, with median age of 22 (range 12–59) years, body mass index (BMI) of 25.4 (range 17–44), and median Tegner activity score of 6 (range 2–10). Fifty‐two patients (23 %) were included in the excellent 6‐month group, while 172 patients (77 %) were in the delayed 6‐month group. In univariate analysis, favourable factors with the excellent 6‐month outcome group were younger age (24 vs. 27; p = 0.01), lower BMI (24.5 vs. 26.2; p = 0.03), and minimal articular cartilage damage (71 vs. 56 %; p = 0.048). In multivariate analysis, a negative effect was observed for patients older than 30 years that had ACL reconstruction with autograft (p = 0.0004).ConclusionFactors significantly associated with excellent 6‐month functional and isokinetic test results following ACL reconstruction included younger age, lower BMI, and minimal cartilage degeneration. The use of allograft was associated with improved functional and strength testing after ACL reconstruction in patients over 30 years of age.Level of evidencePrognostic/therapeutic study, Level III.

AbstractPurposeCurrently, there is a paucity of literature regarding outcomes after isolated labral debridement. The purpose of this study was to (1) report the reoperation rate following isolated labral debridement, (2) report clinical and functional outcomes after labral debridement with a minimum 2‐year follow‐up and (3) identify risk factors for worse clinical and functional outcomes. It was hypothesized that inferior outcomes are associated with an increasing Tönnis grade and those with untreated femoral acetabular impingement (FAI).MethodsThe records of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between 1998 and 2005 were reviewed. Patients with labral tears who underwent isolated arthroscopic labral debridement were identified. Kaplan–Meier estimate of failure (defined as subsequent surgery) was performed for all patients. Patients with minimum 2‐year follow‐up were assessed with Modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS) and Hip Outcome Score (HOS). Univariate analysis was then performed to assess which factors were associated with worse clinical and functional outcomes.ResultsFifty‐nine hips in 57 patients met our inclusion criteria (39 females, 18 males) with a mean age of 46 ± 14 years and mean follow‐up of 5 (range 2–14) years. Overall, 45 % of the hips failed for repeat surgery (20 %) or rating for hip function as abnormal or severely abnormal (25 %). Twelve hips (20 %) required subsequent surgical intervention at a mean 23 (range 6–60) months (7 total hip arthroplasties, 2 open revisions, 3 arthroscopic revisions). Of the remaining hips, mean MHHS was 83.4 ± 19.7, mean HOS ADL score was 83.8 ± 21.3 and mean HOS sport score was 70.6 ± 32.9, with 33 of 41 (75 %) reporting normal or nearly normal current level of function. Univariate analysis revealed that hips with untreated bony impingement (p = 0.01) or requiring concomitant chondroplasty (p = 0.03) had inferior clinical outcome scores.ConclusionsIsolated arthroscopic labral debridement for hip labral tears had 45 % combined poor results when strictly defining failure as repeat surgery or abnormal hip rating. Untreated FAI and concomitant chondroplasty were risk factors for inferior outcome. We recommend concomitant treatment for bony impingement lesions and preservation of the labrum whenever possible.Level of evidenceRetrospective case series, Level IV.

Abstract We present our arthroscopic technique for fixation of an unstable osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) lesion. This technique includes arthroscopic evaluation of cartilage and bone quality of the OCD fragment, hinging open the lesion, debridement of fibrous nonunion tissue, reducing the fragment, and obtaining multi‐point compression screw fixation. This technique avoids the morbidity of an open arthrotomy and should be considered when treating an unstable OCD lesion with adequate bone for fixation. Technique Video video See video under supplementary data.

Context: Articular cartilage injuries are common in patients presenting to surgeons with primary complaints of knee pain or mechanical symptoms. Treatment options include comprehensive nonoperative management, palliative surgery, joint preservation operations, and arthroplasty. Evidence Acquisition: A MEDLINE search on articular cartilage restoration techniques of the knee was conducted to identify outcome studies published from 1993 to 2013. Special emphasis was given to Level 1 and 2 published studies. Study Design: Clinical review. Level of Evidence: Level 3. Results: Current surgical options with documented outcomes in treating chondral injuries in the knee include the following: microfracture, osteochondral autograft transfer, osteochondral allograft transplant, and autologous chondrocyte transplantation. Generally, results are favorable regarding patient satisfaction and return to sport when proper treatment algorithms and surgical techniques are followed, with 52% to 96% of patients demonstrating good to excellent clinical outcomes and 66% to 91% returning to sport at preinjury levels. Conclusion: Clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes may be improved in the majority of patients with articular cartilage restoration surgery; however, some patients may not fully return to their preinjury activity levels postoperatively. In active and athletic patient populations, biological techniques that restore the articular surface may be options that provide symptom relief and return patients to their prior levels of function.

AbstractPurposeTo compare the accuracy and reliability of the anatomic and radiographic techniques for identifying the isometric point of the knee.MethodsOnly four specimens were used; however, eight experienced multiligament knee injury surgeons were recruited to address this limitation. Surgeons estimated the isometric point (EIP) on the medial and lateral sides using an anatomic and radiographic method. The x and y coordinates of the EIP were compared to the true isometric point (TIP). T‐tests and interclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were performed to determine the accuracy and reliability between the methods.ResultsThere was no difference in placement of the EIP on the medial side of the knee in the anterior/posterior (x; p = n.s.) and superior/inferior direction (y;p = n.s). The EIP was anterior (p = 0.001) to the TIP with the radiographic method on the lateral side and approached significance (p = 0.05) in the superior/inferior direction. The ICC (95 % CI) for identifying the EIP on the medial side in the anterior/posterior direction using the anatomic method was 0.64 (0.28–0.96) and 0.11 (−0.06 to 0.77) in the superior/inferior direction. Using the radiographic method, the ICC in the anterior/posterior and superior/inferior direction was 0.49 (0.14–0.94) and 0.15 (−0.47 to 0.81), respectively. On the lateral side, the ICC for the anatomic method was 0.84 (0.56–0.99) in the anterior/posterior direction and 0.36 (0.05–0.90) in the superior/inferior direction. Using the radiographic method, the ICC in the anterior/posterior and superior/inferior direction was 0.61 (0.26–0.96) and 0.89 (0.67–0.99), respectively.ConclusionsThere was no difference in accuracy on the medial side of the knee. On the lateral side, the anatomic method was more accurate in the anterior/posterior direction. Reliability was greater in the anterior/posterior direction on both sides of the knee. Surgeons were most likely to place the isometric point anterior and superior to the TIP on both the medial and lateral sides of the knee with either method which has the potential to cause graft lengthening. This should be taken into consideration during reconstruction/repair of the MCL/PMC and LCL/PLC.

Objectives: Peroneal nerve injuries are not uncommon with multiligament (ML) knee dislocations. However, there remains little information on outcome of these injuries. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to (1) report the clinical and functional outcomes after ML knee injury with concomitant peroneal nerve palsy, (2) compare recovery and outcome with partial versus complete peroneal nerve injury, (3) compare outcomes to a matched cohort of ML knee injuries without concomitant peroneal nerve palsy. Methods: Patients that underwent surgical reconstruction of a ML knee injury from 1993 to 2010 were reviewed and concomitant nerve injuries were identified, forming the peroneal nerve injury group (PI). Patient demographics, injury mechanism, modified Schenck classification, and peroneal nerve function, treatment, and recovery were documented. Patients were divided into two sub-groups: complete peroneal nerve palsy (CNP) and partial peroneal nerve palsy (PNP). A second group of patients with ML knee injury without peroneal nerve injury were identified, forming the no nerve injury group (NI). The PI and NI groups were matched based on Modified Schenck Classification, age, and gender. Peroneal nerve motor grade was assessed at last clinical follow-up and outcome scores were obtained using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm forms at a minimum of 2 years post-op. Data was analyzed using univariate and multivariate models to assess for predictive factors between the groups. Results: 27 patients (24 males, 3 females) met inclusion criteria for the PI group (9 CNP and 18 PNP). Treatment for CNP included an AFO for all patients, non-operative (1), neurolysis (2), tendon transfer (3), nerve transfer (1), and combined nerve/tendon transfer (1). One patient in the CNP group required additional surgery, undergoing below knee amputation. Treatment for PNP included non-op (12), neurolysis (4), nerve transfer (1), and combined nerve/tendon transfer (1). 2 patients with incomplete nerve palsy required additional surgery, undergoing an arthrodesis and a total knee arthroplasty. 3 CNP (37.5%) and 15 PNP (83.3%) regained 3/5 or greater tibialis anterior (TA) strength. PNP was associated with increased recovery of 3/5 extensor hallucis longus (EHL) strength (p=0.0093). Outcome scores were obtained for 17 of the remaining patients at a mean 6.6 (range 2-18) years. Univariate analysis revealed no difference between the CNP and PNP groups. Final motor grade of 3/5 did not predict improved outcomes. Not undergoing a tendon transfer procedure predicted better outcomes on the IKDC score (70.5 vs 45.0; p=0.027). All other peroneal nerve interventions were not associated with improved motor or functional outcome. 20 patients formed the NI group. The PI and NI groups were matched on gender (18 M, 2 F), age (mean 30.8 vs 29.5 years), and Modified Schenck Classification (2 KD-I, 10 KD-IIIL, 5 KD-IV, 3 KD-V vs 2, 7, 8, and 3 respectively). In univariate analysis, the PI group had inferior outcomes on both the IKDC (64.5 vs 77.3; p=0.036) and Lysholm (67.1 vs 83.0; p=0.023) scores. Conclusion: Patients with partial peroneal nerve palsy are more likely to regain antigravity EHL strength, but not antigravity TA strength. There is no significant difference in outcomes between partial and complete peroneal nerve palsy. In ML knee injuries, patients with peroneal nerve injury have significantly worse outcomes than similar patients without peroneal nerve injury.

Objectives: TT-TG distance is a commonly used measurement for surgical decision-making in patients with patellofemoral malalignment and instability. This measurement has historically been performed utilizing axial CT scans. More recently, MRI has been proposed as an equivalent test for measurement of TT-TG distance. We sought to determine the reliability of TT-TG measurements on both MRI and CT, and to determine whether the measurements can be used interchangeably. Methods: All patients diagnosed with patellar instability who had received both CT and MRI of the knee between 2003 and 2011 were included (n=59 knees in 54 patients). Two fellowship trained musculoskeletal radiologists measured the TT-TG distances for each patient by CT and MRI in a randomized, blinded fashion for a total of 236 measurements. Inter-observer reliability was calculated between radiologists for both imaging modalities and inter-methods reliability was calculated between the two imagining modalities. The results are reported using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Bland Altman analysis (BAA). Results: The 59 knees had a mean TT-TG distance of 16.9 mm (range: 8.3-25.8) by CT and 14.7 mm (range: 1.5-25.1) by MRI. Eighteen patients (31%) had a TT-TG ≥ 20 mm by CT, and only 9 (15%) had a TT-TG ≥ 20 mm by MRI. Inter-observer reliability between the radiologists was considered excellent for both CT and MRI (ICC = 0.777 and 0.843 respectively). When comparing CT to MRI, however, the ICC was considered only fair for each of the two raters (0.532 and 0.539). A total of 11 patients (19%) had a TT-TG ≥ 20 mm on CT preoperatively and underwent distal realignment by tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO). In this surgical subgroup, the mean TT-TG on CT was 22.5 mm (range 19.8-25.8) while the mean TT-TG on MRI was only 18.7 mm (range 14.4-22.8). Conclusion: TT-TG distance can be measured with excellent inter-rater reliability on both MRI and CT scans; however, the values derived from these two tests may not be interchangeable. This observation should be taken into consideration when MRI is used for surgical planning since MRI may underestimate TT-TG distance when compared to CT.

Background: Tibial tubercle–trochlear groove distance (TT-TG) is a commonly used measurement for surgical decision making in patients with patellofemoral malalignment and instability. This measurement has historically been performed utilizing axial computed tomography (CT). More recently, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been proposed as an equivalent method, but this has not yet been fully validated. Purpose: To determine the reliability of TT-TG distance measurements on both MRI and CT and to determine whether the measurements are interchangeable with one another. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. Methods: All patients with patellar instability who underwent both CT and MRI of the knee from 2003 to 2011 were included (n = 59 knees in 54 patients). Two fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologists measured the TT-TG distances for each patient by CT and MRI in a randomized, blinded fashion. Interobserver reliability was calculated between radiologists for both imaging modalities, and intermethod reliability was calculated between the 2 imaging modalities. The results are reported using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman analysis. Results: The 59 knees had a mean TT-TG distance of 16.9 mm (range, 8.3-25.8 mm) by CT and 14.7 mm (range, 1.5-25.1 mm) by MRI. Interobserver reliability between the radiologists was considered excellent for both CT and MRI (ICC = 0.777 and 0.843, respectively). When comparing CT to MRI, the ICC was considered only fair for each of the raters (0.532 and 0.539). Eleven patients (19%) had a TT-TG distance of ≥20 mm on CT preoperatively and underwent distal realignment by tibial tubercle osteotomy. In this surgical subgroup, the mean TT-TG distance was 22.5 mm (range, 19.8-25.8 mm) by CT and only 18.7 mm (range, 14.4-22.8 mm) by MRI for a mean difference of 3.80 mm ( P < .001). Conclusion: The TT-TG distance can be measured with excellent interrater reliability on both MRI and CT; however, the values derived from these 2 tests may not be interchangeable. This observation should be taken into consideration when MRI is used for surgical planning because MRI may underestimate the TT-TG distance when compared with CT.