No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundWhile there is growing evidence for the efficacy of SM to treat LBP, little is known on the mechanisms and physiologic effects of these treatments. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to determine whether SM alters the amplitude of the motor evoked potential (MEP) or the short-latency stretch reflex of the erector spinae muscles, and whether these physiologic responses depend on whether SM causes an audible joint sound.MethodsWe used transcranial magnetic stimulation to elicit MEPs and electromechanical tapping to elicit short-latency stretch reflexes in 10 patients with chronic LBP and 10 asymptomatic controls. Neurophysiologic outcomes were measured before and after SM. Changes in MEP and stretch reflex amplitude were examined based on patient grouping (LBP vs. controls), and whether SM caused an audible joint sound.ResultsSM did not alter the erector spinae MEP amplitude in patients with LBP (0.80 ± 0.33 vs. 0.80 ± 0.30 μV) or in asymptomatic controls (0.56 ± 0.09 vs. 0.57 ± 0.06 μV). Similarly, SM did not alter the erector spinae stretch reflex amplitude in patients with LBP (0.66 ± 0.12 vs. 0.66 ± 0.15 μV) or in asymptomatic controls (0.60 ± 0.09 vs. 0.55 ± 0.08 μV). Interestingly, study participants exhibiting an audible response exhibited a 20% decrease in the stretch reflex (p < 0.05).ConclusionsThese findings suggest that a single SM treatment does not systematically alter corticospinal or stretch reflex excitability of the erector spinae muscles (when assessed ~ 10-minutes following SM); however, they do indicate that the stretch reflex is attenuated when SM causes an audible response. This finding provides insight into the mechanisms of SM, and suggests that SM that produces an audible response may mechanistically act to decrease the sensitivity of the muscle spindles and/or the various segmental sites of the Ia reflex pathway.

AIMTo clarify the effectiveness of scaffold-based therapy for osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLT).METHODSA systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases was performed during August 2016 and updated in January 2017. Included studies were evaluated with regard to the level of evidence (LOE) and quality of evidence (QOE) using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. Variable reporting outcome data, clinical outcomes, and the percentage of patients who returned to sport at previous level were also evaluated.RESULTSTwenty-eight studies for a total of 897 ankles were included; 96% were either LOE III or IV. Studies were designated as either of poor or fair quality. There were 30 treatment groups reporting six different scaffold repair techniques: 13 matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT), nine bone marrow derived cell transplantation (BMDCT), four autologous matrix-induced chondrogeneis (AMIC), and four studies of other techniques. The categories of general demographics (93%) and patient-reported outcome data (85%) were well reported. Study design (73%), imaging data (73%), clinical variables (49%), and patient history (30%) were also included. The weighted mean American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score at final follow-up was: 86.7 in MACT, 88.2 in BMDCT, and 82.3 in AMIC. Eight studies reported that a weighted mean of 68.3% of patients returned to a previous level of sport activity.CONCLUSIONScaffold-based therapy for OLT may produce favorable clinical outcomes, but low LOE, poor QOE, and variability of the data have confounded the effectiveness of this treatment.

Purpose of review Osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLT) are common injuries in athletes. The purpose of this study is to comprehensively review the clinical results and return to sport capacity in athletes following treatment for OLT. Recent findings Reparative procedures, such as bone marrow stimulation, and replacement procedures, such as autologous osteochondral transplantation, provide good clinical outcomes in short-and mid-term follow-up in the athlete. Recently, biological augmentation and scaffold-based therapies have been shown to improve clinical and radiological outcomes in OLT in both the general population and athletes. Summary Most studies are of a low level of evidence. Studies analyzing the return to sport capability in athletes are further lacking. High-level evidence and well-designed clinical trials are required to establish the most effective treatment protocol.

No abstract

No abstract