The complex ultrastructure of the meniscus determines its vital functions for the knee, the lower extremity, and the body.The most recent concise, reliable, and valid classification system for meniscal tears is the International Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery and Orthopaedic Sports Medicine (ISAKOS) Classification, which takes into account the subsequent parameters: tear depth, tear pattern, tear length, tear location/rim width, radial location, location according to the popliteal hiatus, and quality of the meniscal tissue.It is the orthopaedic surgeon’s responsibility to combine clinical information, radiological images, and clinical experience in an effort to individualize management of meniscal tears, taking into account factors related to the patient and lesion.Surgeons should strive not to operate in most cases, but to protect, repair or reconstruct, in order to prevent early development of osteoarthritis by restoring the native structure, function, and biomechanics of the meniscus.Currently, there are three main methods of modern surgical management of meniscus tears: arthroscopic partial meniscectomy; meniscal repair with or without augmentation techniques; and meniscal reconstruction. Meniscus surgery has come a long way from the old slogan, “If it is torn, take it out!” to the currently accepted slogan, “Save the meniscus!” which has guided evolving modern treatment methods for meniscal tears. This last slogan will probably constitute the basis for newer alternative biological treatment methods in the future.Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170067.

The results indicated that distal femoral groove with inadequate patellar position becomes more flattened and causes predisposition for patellar instability. Consequently, the clinical relevance of this study was that early reconstruction of the patellofemoral joint should be performed in the childhood to prevent the patellofemoral problems that are likely to be encountered in the following years.

No abstract

Total shoulder arthroplasty and shoulder hemiarthroplasty have been the traditional method for treating a variety of shoulder conditions, including arthritis, cuff tear arthropathy, and some fracture types. However, these procedures did not provide consistently good results for patients with torn rotator cuffs. The development of the reverse prosthesis by Grammont in the late 20th century revolutionized the treatment of the rotator-cuff-deficient shoulder with arthritis. The main indication for the reverse prosthesis remains the patient with cuff tear arthropathy who has pain and loss of motion. Because the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty produced such good results in these patients, the indications for the reverse prosthesis have expanded to include other shoulder conditions that have previously been difficult to treat successfully and predictably. This review discusses and critically reviews these newer indications for the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

The reported incidence of meniscal tears is approximately 61 per 100,000. In instances where preservation of the native meniscus is no longer a feasible option, meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) and implants or scaffolds may be considered. The goal of this review was to compare the success and failure rates of two techniques, MAT and meniscal scaffolds, and make an inference which treatment is more preferable at the present time and future. Studies that met inclusion criteria were assessed for technique used, type of transplant used, number of procedures included in the study, mean age of patients, mean follow-up time, number of failures, failure rate, and reported reoperation rate. Fifteen studies for the MAT group and 7 studies for the meniscal scaffold group were identified. In this selection of studies, the average failure rate in the MAT group was 18.7% and average reoperation rate was 31.3%. The average failure rate in the meniscal scaffold group was 5.6%, and average reoperation rate was 6.9%. It appears that although MAT is associated with high reoperation and failure rates, the limited number of studies on both MAT and scaffolds and mainly short-term results of scaffold studies make it difficult to make an objective comparison.

Since the introduction of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) in 1987 (in Europe) and 2004 (in the United States), the number of RTSAs performed annually has increased.Although the main indication for RTSA has been rotator cuff tears, indications have expanded to include several shoulder conditions, many of which involve dysfunction of the rotator cuff.RTSA complications have been reported to affect 19% to 68% of patients and include acromial fracture, haematoma, infection, instability, mechanical baseplate failure, neurological injury, periprosthetic fracture and scapular notching.Current controversies in RTSA include optimal baseplate positioning, humeral neck-shaft angle (135° versus 155°), glenosphere placement (medial, lateral or bony increased offset RTSA) and subscapularis repair.Improvements in prosthesis design, surgeon experience and clinical results will need to occur to optimize this treatment for many shoulder conditions.Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3:58–69 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170044

Case-control study, Level III.

Infrapatellar fat pad is a densely vascularized and innervated extrasynovial tissue that fills the anterior knee compartment. It plays a role in knee biomechanics as well as constitutes a source of stem cells for regeneration after knee injury. Infrapatellar fat pad-derived stem cells (IPFP-ASCs) possess enhanced and age-independent differentiation capacity as compared to other stem cells, which makes them a very promising candidate in stem cell-based regenerative therapy. The aims of this review are to outline the latest advances and potential trends in using IPFP-ASCs and to emphasize the advantages over other sources of stem cells for applications in orthopedic surgery.