Prognostic study (diagnostic), Level II.

Although injuries to the posterolateral corner of the knee were previously considered to be a rare condition, they have been shown to be present in almost 16% of all knee injuries and are responsible for sustained instability and failure of concomitant reconstructions if not properly recognized. Although also once considered to be the “dark side of the knee”, increased knowledge of the posterolateral corner anatomy and biomechanics has led to improved diagnostic ability with better understanding of physical and imaging examinations. The management of posterolateral corner injuries has also evolved and good outcomes have been reported after operative treatment following anatomical reconstruction principles.

Meniscus repair failure rate was not different in patients who were younger than 40 years versus those who were 40 years or older at time of meniscus index surgery. Patients who underwent meniscus suture repair had high function and high patient satisfaction at an average of 16 years after meniscus suture repair, and no differences were seen based on age.

BackgroundRevision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction requires a precise evaluation of previous tunnel locations and diameters. Enlargement of the tunnels, despite not usually affecting primary reconstruction outcomes, plays an important role in revision ACL management. Three dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) models are reported to be the most accurate method for identifying the tunnel position and possible conflicts with a revision tunnel placement. However, the ability of 3D CT to measure the tunnel size is still not proven. The goal of this study was to evaluate the ability of measuring the size of the bone tunnels in ACL reconstructed knees with 3D CT compared to the traditional two dimensional (2D) CT method.MethodsTwenty-four patients had CT scans performed immediately following ACL reconstruction surgery. Their femoral tunnels size were measured by a standard 2D CT measurement and then compared with three novel 3D CT measuring methods: the best transverse section method, the best fit cylinder method and the wall thickness method. The drill size used during surgery was used as a control measure for the tunnel width. Intra-class correlation coefficients were obtained.ResultsThe intra-class correlation coefficient and respective 95% confidence interval range (ICC [95%CI]) for the three methods compared with the drill sizes were 0.899 [0.811-0.947] for the best transverse section method, 0.745 [0.553-0.862] for the best fit cylinder method, −0.004 [−0.081 to −0.12] for the wall thickness method and 0.922 [0.713-0.97] for the 2D CT method. The mean differences compared to the drill size were 0.02 mm for the best fit transverse section method, 0.01 mm for the best fit cylinder diameter method, 3.34 mm for the wall thickness method and 0.29 mm for the 2D CT method. The intra-rater agreement (ICC [95%CI]) was excellent for the best transverse section method 0.999 [0.998-0.999] and the 2D CT method 0.969 [0.941-0.984].ConclusionsThe 3D best transverse section method presented a high correlation to the drill sizes and high intra-rater agreement, and was the best method for ACL tunnel evaluation in a 3D CT based model.

ObjectiveTo assess the inter- and intraobserver reproducibility of the original version and different descriptions of the Kellgren and Lawrence classification used in epidemiological studies for osteoarthritis of the knee.MethodsThe study included 72 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Three medical members of the Brazilian Society of Knee Surgery were invited to evaluate the images. An intra- and interobserver analysis was conducted, with an interval of one month. The intraobserver agreement was analyzed using the weighted Cohen's Kappa coefficient. The interobserver agreement was analyzed using the Krippendorff alpha coefficient (α).ResultsThe intraobserver assessment indicated conflicting results. In the interobserver analysis, the level of agreement was superficial.ConclusionsThe classification of Kellgren and Lawrence and its variants generated a low reproducibility between observers. The intraobserver analysis showed a lack of uniformity in the use of this classification and its variants, even among experienced observers.