IV, retrospective and prospective cohort study.

The natural history of non-operated partial ACL tear is good over the medium term, especially if patients limit their sports activities. The greater the functional instability, the more frequent is residual pain. Laxity, although not quantified, seems to progress with time, with a positive pivot shift test emerging in a quarter of cases. Functional management may be recommended in non-athletic patients without meniscal lesion, but surgical treatment may be recommended in other patients. Indications for ACL reconstruction are thus the same in partial as in complete tear.

No abstract

Iliotibial band syndrome (ITBS) is an overuse injury mainly affecting runners. The initial treatment is conservative. Only, in recalcitrant cases surgery is indicated. Several open techniques have been described. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the results of a standardized arthroscopic technique for treatment of a resistant ITBS. Thirty-six athletes with a resistant ITBS were treated with a standardized arthroscopic technique, limited to the resection of lateral synovial recess. Thirty-three patients were available for follow-up (mean 2 years 4 months). Thirty-two patients (34 knees) had good or excellent results. All patients went back to sports after 3 months. In two patients a meniscal lesion was found, which required treatment. One patient with only a fair result had associated cartilage lesions of the femoral condyle. Our results show that arthroscopic treatment of resistant ITBS is a valid option with a consistently good outcome. In addition, this arthroscopic approach allows excluding or treating other intra-articular pathology.

The GNRB(®) device offers greater reproducibility than TELOS™ when used to quantitate anterior tibial translation. The limited sample size may have prevented the detection of a significant difference between mean values. In addition, disadvantages of the TELOS™ include radiation exposure of the patient, operator-dependency of measurements made on the radiographs, and absence of a biofeedback system to limit hamstring contraction. GNRB(®) does have hamstring contraction biofeedback control but uses another parameter, namely, patellar pressure, for which the optimal value is unknown. Quadriceps and hamstring co-contraction induced by excessive patellar pressure may influence anterior tibial translation. The optimal patellar pressure value needs to be determined.