Citations

Background: In skeletally immature patients, alternative surgical approaches should be undertaken for the treatment of patellofemoral instability that respect the open physis. Remaining growth can be exploited for correction of genu valgum, a known anatomic risk factor of patellofemoral instability. Indications: A skeletally immature 14-year-old boy with bilateral genu valgum and patella alta presented with symptomatic, recurrent left knee patellar instability precluding sports participation and causing dysfunction in his activities of daily living. Technique Description: A midline approach to the knee was used. Medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFL-R) was completed up until the point of femoral-sided allograft fixation. The socket for femoral-sided graft fixation was reamed with an all-epiphyseal technique. Next, growth modulation with temporary hemiepiphysiodesis of the medial distal femoral physis was undertaken with an 8-plate bilaterally. Patellar tendon shortening was completed. Femoral-sided graft fixation for the MPFL-R was then completed. Results: There were no acute complications associated with surgery. Surgical management led to resolution of the patient’s patellar instability. The patient is being followed for timing of hemiepiphysiodesis plate removal. Discussion/Conclusion: In skeletally immature patients, a physeal-sparing MPFL-R is a viable treatment option to address recurrent patellar instability. Other anatomic risk factors, such as genu valgum and patella alta, may be concomitantly addressed using techniques that are respective of the open physis. 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: Patellofemoral instability (PFI) is a condition that leads to recurrent dislocation events and is typically secondary to extensor mechanism malalignment and rotational deformities. To correct malalignment, a tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO) can be performed; however, an understanding of the associated complications, recurrence rates, and potential for reoperation is necessary. Purpose: To systematically review the literature to determine the incidence of postoperative complications, rate of recurrent instability, and all-cause reoperation rate after TTO for PFI. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence 4. Methods: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were queried for studies that reported complications after TTO. No date limits were applied. A total of 1050 studies were identified. Complications were categorized into “minor” and “major” groups using a modified Clavien-Dindo Classification. A meta-analysis was conducted to examine complication rates, recurrent instability, and all-cause reoperation, utilizing a DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. A meta-analysis for recurrent instability was subgrouped according to follow-up periods of ≤2 years and >2 years. Results: A total of 38 studies were included, comprising 1546 patients, representing 1733 knees. The study dates ranged from 1989 to 2024, and the level of evidence ranged from 2 to 4. The weighted mean age at surgery was 24.1 years (range, 20-54 years), and 67% of patients were women. The weighted mean follow-up of all studies was 4.2 years. Overall, 197 minor complications, 39 major complications, 90 recurrent instability events, and 275 reoperations were identified. The minor complication rate was 9% (range, 0%-65% [95% CI, 6%-13%]). The major complication rate was 3% (range, 0%-10% [95% CI, 3%-4%]). Seven studies had a ≤2-year follow-up, and the remaining 31 studies had a >2-year follow-up. The recurrent instability rate was 3% in studies with ≤2 years of follow-ups (range, 0%-26% [95% CI, 1%-13%]). In studies with >2 years of follow-up, the recurrent instability rate was 8% (range, 0%-31% [95% CI, 6%-12%]). The all-cause reoperation rate was 16% (range, 0%-54% [95% CI, 11%-21%]). Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis identified the incidence of complications (17%), the rate of recurrent instability (3%-8%), and the all-cause reoperation rate (16%) after TTO. TTO, performed alone or in combination with medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction for the treatment of PFI, reliably improved clinical outcome scores in the setting of variable complication rates. Interestingly, rates of recurrent instability increased over time, and most reoperations were undertaken for hardware removal rather than revision patellar stabilization surgery.

Purpose To compare clinical and functional outcomes (including range of motion, clinical laxity, reoperation/revision rates, and patient‐reported outcome measures) of combined anterior cruciate ligament/posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR/PCLR) with and without suture tape (ST) augmentation via a propensity‐matched cohort analysis. Methods A retrospective review was performed to identify all patients who underwent simultaneous primary ACLR/PCLR between 2001 and 2022. A 1:1 propensity match was performed using patient sex, Schenck classification grade, age ±8 years, and body mass index ±10 to produce 2 cohorts: ACLR/PCLR with and without (control) ST augmentation. Clinical outcomes (visual analog scale [VAS], range of motion, Tegner activity scale, Lysholm score, and International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score) were analyzed. Results The propensity match produced a final cohort of 50 ACLR/PCLR patients: 25 with ST augmentation and 25 nonaugmented controls. Most patients had a KD3M injury (12 in each cohort), and no significant differences were noted in concomitant neurovascular, meniscal, or chondral injuries between the groups. Forty patients (80%) completed follow‐up at a mean of 4.7 years for the ST cohort and 8.5 years for the control cohort ( P > .05). Postoperative ST versus control values for outcome measures including VAS at rest (0.9 vs 1.5; P = .71), VAS with use (3.0 vs 2.2; P = .24), International Knee Documentation Committee (75.7 vs 76.3; P = .37), Lysholm (81.8 vs 77.6; P = .91), and Tegner activity (4.8 vs 5.4; P = .37) scores showed no differences ( P > .05 for all). There were no differences in excessive postoperative clinical laxity between ST and control cohorts (ST n = 1 vs control n = 2, Lachman 2+, P = .140; ST n = 3 vs control n = 1, posterior drawer 2+, P = .122). The total number of patients who underwent reoperation was 7 of 25 (28%) for the ST cohort and 8 of 25 (32%) for the control cohort ( P = .76). Conclusions Concomitant ACLR/PCLR utilizing ST augmentation showed similarly satisfactory postoperative clinical outcomes at a minimum 2‐year follow‐up compared to a matched cohort without ST. The use of an independent ST did not limit motion or increase the incidence of complications or revision surgery. Level of Evidence Level III, retrospective comparative case series.

Background: Treatment decisions in patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries are influenced by multiple factors, such as the desire to return to sports or symptomatic instability. Identifying the differential treatment effect of ACL reconstruction (ACLR) compared with nonoperative management on a patient-specific level can inform surgical decision-making. Hypothesis: Unsupervised machine learning can identify distinct patient subgroups based on outcome achievement after ACL injury, and ACLR will exert a protective effect on the development of posttraumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) over nonoperative management. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A longitudinal populational registry identified patients with ACL injuries from 1990 to 2016 with a minimum 7.5-year follow-up. An unsupervised random forest algorithm was utilized to develop and validate patient subgroups. Treatment effects of ACLR on outcomes were analyzed using a machine learning causal inference estimator. Patient subgroup membership was incorporated into a multivariable logistic regression to identify factors predictive of optimal outcomes. Results: A total of 923 patients (785 primary ACLR, 138 nonoperative) were included. The random forest algorithm arrived at an optimal partition of 2 subgroups, with 653 patients in the optimal outcome subgroup (368 male [56.4%]; mean age, 26.0 ± 10.2 years; mean body mass index [BMI], 26.5 ± 4.30) and 270 patients in the suboptimal outcome subgroup (152 male [56.3%]; mean age, 35.0 ± 10.1 years; mean BMI, 30.5 ± 5.54). The latter group demonstrated significantly increased rates of secondary meniscal injury, development of symptomatic PTOA, and progression to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at the final follow-up (all P < .01). In the optimal outcome subgroup, ACLR had significantly protective treatment effects on the risk of secondary meniscal injury (average treatment effect [ATE], 61%), contralateral ACL injury (ATE, 8%), symptomatic PTOA (ATE, 16%), and progression to TKA (ATE, 6%) (all P < .01). Conversely, in the suboptimal outcome subgroup, ACLR only protected against symptomatic PTOA (ATE, 11%) and progression to TKA (ATE, 8%) (both P < .01). Conclusion: Two clinically meaningful subgroups were identified from retrospectively collected data and found to experience differential treatment responses after ACL injuries. ACLR decreased the rate of development of PTOA and TKA in both subgroups but was not as effective in preventing secondary meniscal injuries or contralateral ACL injuries in patients who were older, heavier, or had concomitant medial meniscus injuries.

Abstract Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) using bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft remains one of the most common autografts used, and there is significant evidence to support its title as the “gold standard.” There are nuances and technical challenges associated with every step of an ACLR, which always leave room for improvement. The purpose of this Technical Note is to provide reproducible, technical pearls where errors are commonly encountered during ACLR. In this article, we detail 10 technical pearls that surgeons should consider to enhance operative workflow and optimize success during ACLR with a bone–patellar tendon–bone autograft. Technique Video video See video under supplementary data.

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.

Abstract Arthrofibrosis of the knee is a difficult‐to‐manage complication after meniscoligamentous knee injuries, traumatic injuries with articular extension, and surgeries to treat these conditions. Treatment protocols for the management of postoperative arthrofibrosis exhaust nonoperative therapies before proceeding to the operating room for lysis of adhesions (LOA). Although LOA restores range of motion in most cases, a recurrence of arthrofibrosis is possible when postoperative therapy protocols are not strictly followed. Limited treatment options exist in the setting of recalcitrant arthrofibrosis. Revision arthroscopic LOA may be performed in this scenario. This revision procedure places neurovascular anatomy in the posterior compartment at risk. Performing a posterior capsule release in the arthroscopic management of recalcitrant arthrofibrosis is challenging but important to optimize recovery of range of motion. This Technical Note and accompanying video present a stepwise approach to LOA that demonstrates a safe method for performing an arthroscopic posterior capsule release in these challenging cases. Technique Video video See video under supplementary data.

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.