No abstract

Recently, the interest in surgical techniques that reconstruct the anteromedial (AM) and the posterolateral (PL) bundles of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) has risen. This review focuses on the structural as well as the mechanical properties of the ACL and the anatomical details of the femoral origin, midsubstance, and tibial insertion of AM and PL bundles of the ACL. The terminology of AM and PL bundles is chosen according to the tibial insertion and determined by their functional tensioning pattern throughout knee flexion. Close to extension the AM is moderately loose and the PL is tight. As the knee is flexed, the femoral attachment of the ACL becomes more horizontally oriented, causing the AM bundle to tighten and the PM bundle to loosen up. The ACL has been described to be restraint to anterior tibial displacement and internal tibial rotation. The rotational component might be represented by the PL bundle. The femoral origin has an oval shape with the center of the AM close to over-the-top position and the center of the PL close to the anterior and inferior cartilage margin. Tibial and femoral insertions of the ACL are over 3.5 times larger when compared to the midsubstance and tunnel placement is more challenging because of the limited size of potential grafts selection of tunnel site placement. For reconstruction, both bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) and quadrupled hamstring grafts are used. Structural properties of a 10 mm wide BPTB or quadrupled hamstring graft have been reported to be comparable with those of the native ACL.

Injuries to the pectoralis major muscle are relatively infrequent but result in pain, weakness, and deformity of the upper extremity. The usual injury mechanism is during eccentric shortening of the pectoralis major under heavy load, such as when performing a bench press exercise. The ability to detect and treat a pectoralis major rupture is important for both the clinician and the patient and is aided with knowledge of the anatomy, the clinical findings, and results of nonoperative and operative care. It is important to understand the physical demands and desires of the patient as well as to understand the outcomes of both nonoperative and operative care to make an informed decision regarding optimal treatment. This article highlights the importance of the clinical examination in identifying the injury, examines various surgical techniques to repair the rupture, and reports on potential complication and reinjury rates.

No abstract

Knee meniscectomy is the most common procedure performed by orthopaedic surgeons. While it is generally believed that loss of meniscal tissue leads to osteoarthritis and poor knee function, many variables may significantly influence this outcome. Through literature search engines including PubMed and Ovid, 4 randomized controlled trials, 2 prospective cohorts, and 23 retrospective cohorts that fit the criteria for level I, II, and III level of evidence were included in this systematic review. For the level III evidence studies, follow-up of 5 years or more was required. Preoperative and intraoperative predictors of poor clinical or radiographic outcomes included total meniscectomy or removal of the peripheral meniscal rim, lateral meniscectomy, degenerative meniscal tears, presence of chondral damage, presence of hand osteoarthritis suggestive of genetic predisposition, and increased body mass index. Variables that were not predictive of outcome or were inconclusive or had mixed results included meniscal tear pattern, age, mechanical alignment, sex of patient, activity level, and meniscal tears associated with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. While an intact meniscus or meniscal repair was generally favorable in the ACL-reconstructed knees, meniscal repair of degenerative meniscal tissue was not favorable. There is a lack of uniformity in the literature on this subject with a preponderance of lower level evidence. Although randomized controlled trials are considered to be the gold standard in medical research, a multicenter prospective cohort design may be more appropriate in assessing the long-term outcome of meniscal surgery and the role that multiple preoperative and intraoperative variables may play in clinical outcomes. In addition, future studies should include factors not assessed or adequately evaluated by several of the included studies, such as meniscal tear pattern, age, mechanical alignment, sex of the patient, activity level, meniscal tears associated with other injuries such as the ACL, smoking, and the effect of previous surgery.