A lateral meniscus root repair can reduce internal tibial rotation in the ACL-deficient knee. To check the condition of the lateral posterior meniscus root attachment is clinical relevant as a lateral meniscus root repair might improve rotational stability.
Injuries to the acromioclavicular (AC) joint are common and mostly involve younger, male individuals. Whereas the majority of AC joint dislocations can be treated nonoperatively with a trial of immobilization, pain medication, cryotherapy, and physiotherapy, there are patients that do not respond well to conservative management and may require surgical treatment. Identifying and treating these patients according to the type and chronicity of AC joint dislocation is paramount. To date, a myriad of surgical techniques have been proposed to address unstable AC joint dislocations and are indicative of the uncertainty that exists in optimal management of these injuries. Historically research has focused on the restoration of the coracoclavicular ligament complex. However, recently the importance of the acromioclavicular capsule and ligaments has been emphasized. This review aims to provide the reader with an overview of current treatment strategies and research, as well as future perspectives.
PurposeThe relationship between posterior shoulder instability and increased glenoid retroversion has been documented. Posterior open wedge glenoid osteotomy is a possible treatment option for patients with increased glenoid retroversion, but outcomes in the literature are limited. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to report the clinical and radiological outcomes following posterior glenoid osteotomy. Methods Patients that underwent posterior glenoid osteotomy for posterior shoulder instability with a GR angle of more than or equal to 10°, and were at least 12 months out from surgery, were included in the study. General data, medical history, and radiographic data such as the pre-and postoperative glenoid retroversion angle were extracted from the patients' hospital documentation notes. To evaluate the postoperative outcome, the Rowe standard rating scale for shoulder instability and the Oxford shoulder instability score were collected retrospectively. Results A total of 12 shoulders (11 patients) could be included. The mean pre-operative glenoid retroversion was 23.3° (range 12°-35°) and this reduced signiicantly (p = 0.003) to a mean of 13° (range 1°-28°) postoperatively. At a mean follow-up of 19.8 months (range 14-36), the median Rowe score was 90 points (range 45-100 points) and the median Oxford instability score was 44 points (range 21-48 points). There were no postoperative re-dislocations or revision surgeries; however, one patient reported signs of recurrent shoulder instability and four asymptomatic glenoid neck fractures occurred. Conclusion Open wedge posterior glenoid osteotomy provides reliable clinical results with a low rate of clinical failure in a stringently selected patient cohort at short-term follow-up. However, due to the risk of potentially severe complications, we advocate this procedure for experienced shoulder surgeons only, who are familiar with its anatomical and technical considerations. Level of evidence IV (case series).
Purpose Proximal hamstring tendon avulsions lead to a significant loss of strength and a functional deficit of the respective lower limb and surgery is the recommended treatment. Only little is known about the clinical outcomes and complications when comparing acute and chronic management as well as partial and complete tears. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical results and the complication rate of patients after surgical treatment of proximal hamstring tendon injuries. It was hypothesized that surgical treatment of an acute proximal hamstring avulsion would lead to a superior clinical outcome with a low complication rate and high return to sports rate compared to chronic cases and partial avulsions. Methods Patients who underwent proximal hamstring tendon repair between 2008 and 2015 were retrospectively evaluated with a minimum follow up of 2 years. Outcome measurements were obtained by means of Lysholm score, Harris Hip Score, Visual Analog Scale, and Tegner Activity Scale. Return to sports (RTS) rate was determined. Postoperative adverse events were recorded and complications reported. Patients’ outcomes were compared between acute/chronic repair and partial/complete injury patterns. Results Ninety‐four of 120 (78.3%) were available for final assessment at a mean follow‐up of 56.2 ± 27.2 months. Clinical outcome measures were excellent and did not differ between the treatment groups or between the different injury patterns. RTS was achieved by 86.2% of the patients and was significantly superior after acute treatment (p < 0.05). The overall complication rate was 8.5% and significantly higher in complete tears compared to partial tears and in delay compared to acute surgery (p < 0.05). Conclusion Surgical treatment of proximal hamstring tendon avulsions results in excellent clinical outcome scores and a high RTS rate. Open surgical treatment has shown to be a safe procedure with a low complication rate. Surgical timing is important, as early surgical intervention provides a higher RTS rate and a lower complication rate than delayed surgery and should therefore be preferred in clinical practice. Repair of partial and complete tears lead to similar clinical outcome, but a higher complication rate in complete avulsions. Level of evidence Level IV.
Background: A rupture of the distal biceps tendon is the most common tendon rupture of the elbow and has received increased attention in the past few years. Newly developed all-suture anchors have the potential to minimize surgical trauma and the risk of adverse events because of the use of flexible drills and smaller drill diameters. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to biomechanically compare all-suture anchors and titanium suture anchors for distal biceps tendon repair in cadaveric specimens. The hypothesis was that all-suture anchors would show no differences in load to failure or displacement under cyclic loading compared with titanium suture anchors. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Sixteen unpaired, fresh-frozen human cadaveric elbows were randomized to 2 groups, which underwent onlay distal biceps tendon repair with 2 anchors. Bone mineral density at the radial tuberosity was evaluated in each specimen. In the first group, distal biceps tendon repair was performed using all-suture anchors. In the second group, titanium suture anchors were applied. After cyclic loading for 3000 cycles, the repair constructs were loaded to failure. The peak load to failure as well as repair construct stiffness and mode of failure were determined. Results: The mean (±SD) peak load was 293.53 ± 122.15 N for all-suture anchors and 280.02 ± 69.34 N for titanium suture anchors ( P = .834); mean stiffness was 19.78 ± 2.95 N/mm and 19.30 ± 4.98 N/mm, respectively ( P = .834). The mode of failure was anchor pullout for all specimens during load to failure. At the proximal position, all-suture anchors showed a displacement of 1.53 ± 0.80 mm, and titanium suture anchors showed a displacement of 0.81 ± 0.50 mm ( P = .021) under cyclic loading. At the distal position, a displacement of 1.86 ± 1.04 mm for all-suture anchors and 1.53 ± 1.15 mm for titanium suture anchors was measured ( P = .345). A positive correlation between bone mineral density and load to failure was observed ( r = 0.605; P = .013). Conclusion: All-suture anchors were biomechanically equivalent at time zero to titanium suture anchors for onlay distal biceps tendon repair. While the proximally placed all-suture anchors demonstrated greater displacement than titanium suture anchors, the comparable displacement at the distal position as well as the similar load and mechanism of failure make this difference unlikely to be clinically significant. Clinical Relevance: All-suture anchors performed similarly to titanium suture anchors for onlay distal biceps tendon repair at time zero and represent a reasonable alternative.
Purpose To develop a consensus on diagnosis and treatment of acromioclavicular joint instability. Methods A consensus process following the modified Delphi technique was conducted. Panel members were selected among the European Shoulder Associates of ESSKA. Five rounds were performed between October 2018 and November 2019. The first round consisted of gathering questions which were then divided into blocks referring to imaging, classifications, surgical approach for acute and chronic cases, conservative treatment. Subsequent rounds consisted of condensation by means of an online questionnaire. Consensus was achieved when ≥ 66.7% of the participants agreed on one answer. Descriptive statistic was used to summarize the data. Results A consensus was reached on the following topics. Imaging: a true anteroposterior or a bilateral Zanca view are sufficient for diagnosis. 93% of the panel agreed on clinical override testing during body cross test to identify horizontal instability. The Rockwood classification, as modified by the ISAKOS statement, was deemed valid. The separation line between acute and chronic cases was set at 3 weeks. The panel agreed on arthroscopically assisted anatomic reconstruction using a suspensory device (86.2%), with no need of a biological augmentation (82.8%) in acute injuries, whereas biological reconstruction of coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligaments with tendon graft was suggested in chronic cases. Conservative approach and postoperative care were found similar Conclusion A consensus was found on the main topics of controversy in the management of acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Each step of the diagnostic treatment algorithm was fully investigated and clarified. Level of evidence Level V.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.