No abstract

Bone tunnel–related complications are frequently encountered during revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Issues with tunnel positioning, enlargement, containment, and hardware interference may complicate surgery and compromise outcomes. As a result, several strategies have emerged to address these issues and optimize results. However, a systematic, unified approach to tunnel pathology in revision ACLR is lacking. The purpose of this review is to highlight the current state of the literature on bone tunnel complications and, although extensive literature on the subject is lacking, present an updated approach to the evaluation and management of tunnel-related issues in revision ACLR.

Purpose Medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLR) is often indicated in athletes with lateral patellar instability to prevent recurrence and allow for a successful return to play. In this patient population, the ability to return to play is one of the most important clinical outcomes. The purpose of the current study was to analyze the characteristics of patients who were unable return to play following MPFL reconstruction. Methods A retrospective review of patients who underwent MPFL reconstruction and subsequently did not return to play after a minimum of 12-months of follow-up was performed. Patients were evaluated for their psychological readiness to return to sport using the MPFL-Return to Sport after Injury (MPFL-RSI) score, which is a modiication of the ACL-RSI score. A MPFL-RSI score > 56 is considered a passing score for being psychologically ready to return to play. Additionally, reasons for not returning to play including Visual Analog Scale for pain (VAS), Kujala score, satisfaction, and recurrent instability (including dislocations and subluxations) were evaluated. ResultsThe study included a total of 35 patients who were unable to return to play out of a total cohort of 131 patients who underwent MPFL reconstruction as treatment for patellar instability. Overall, 60% were female with a mean age of 24.5, and a mean follow-up of 38 months. Nine patients (25.7%) passed the MPFL-RSI benchmark of 56 with a mean overall score of 44.2 ± 21.8. The most common primary reasons for not returning to play were 14 were afraid of re-injury, 9 cited other lifestyle factors, 5 did not return due to continued knee pain, 5 were not conident in their ability to perform, and 2 did not return due to a feeling of instability. The mean VAS score was 1.9 ± 2.3, the mean Kujala score was 82.5 ± 14.6, and the mean satisfaction was 76.9%. Three patients (8.7%) reported experiencing a patellar subluxation event post-operatively. No patient sustained a post-operative patellar dislocation. Conclusion Following MPFL reconstruction, patients that do not return to play exhibit poor psychological readiness with the most common reason being fear of re-injury. Level of evidence IV.

No abstract

Although anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a generally successful procedure, failure is still relatively common. An increased posterior tibial slope (PTS) has been shown to increase the anterior position of the tibia relative to the femur at rest and under load in biomechanical studies. Increased PTS has also been shown to increase forces on the native and reconstructed ACL. Clinical studies have demonstrated elevated PTS in patients with failed ACLR and multiple failed ACLR, compared with control subjects. Anterior closing-wedge osteotomies have been shown to decrease PTS and may be indicated in patients who have failed ACLR with a PTS of ≥12°. Available clinical data suggest that the procedure is safe and effective, although evidence is limited to case series. This article presents the relevant biomechanics, clinical observational data on the effects of increased PTS, and an algorithm for evaluating and treating patients with a steep PTS.

No abstract

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failure remains a commonly seen outcome despite advances in technique and graft options. Recent studies have shown that the declination of the tibial plateau slope in the sagittal plane affects the in situ stress on the anterior cruciate ligament. The native posterior tibial slope has been described to range from 7° to 10°. However, several authors have suggested that a posterior tibial slope >12° should be considered pathologic. Given the recent evidence, our institution has begun performing a tibial tubercle–sparing anterior closing wedge proximal tibial osteotomy with cross screw fixation to decrease sagittal plane tibial slope.

Background: Hip arthroscopy is a procedure commonly performed to correct various hip pathologies such as femoroacetabular impingement and labral tears. These hip pathologies commonly affect young, otherwise healthy patients. The recovery after hip arthroscopy can prevent patients from returning to work and impair performance levels, having significant economic repercussions. To date, there has been no cumulative analysis of the existing literature on return to work after hip arthroscopy. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the existing literature regarding return to work after hip arthroscopy and analysis of factors associated with the ability to return to work and time to return to work. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A literature search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was performed based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Studies assessing functional outcomes and return to work, including return to military duty, after hip arthroscopy were included. Patients’ ability to return to work, as well as time to return, was compared between selected studies. Where available, workers’ compensation status as well as type of work was compared. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS, Version 22. P < .05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Twelve studies with 1124 patients were included. Patients were followed for an average of 17.6 months. Using weighted means, the average rate of return to work was 71.35%, while full return to previous work duties was achieved at a rate of 50.89%. Modification to work duties was required at a rate of 15.48%. On average, the time to return to work was 115 days (range, 17-219 days). Rate of return by patients with workers’ compensation status was found to be 85.15% at an average of 132 days (range, 37-211 days). Rate of return to work in workers performing professions reported as strenuous vs light (ie, mostly sedentary) jobs showed a statistically higher return to work in light professions (risk ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.41-0.69). Conclusion: After hip arthroscopy, there is a high rate of return to work at an average of 115 days after surgery. However, full return to work was achieved by only half of patients upon final follow–up.