Background: Magnetic resonance–based measurements of signal intensity have been used to track healing of surgically treated anterior cruciate ligaments (ACLs). However, it is unknown how the signal intensity values in different regions of the ligament or graft change during healing. Hypotheses: (1) Normalized signal intensity of the healing graft or repaired ACL is heterogeneous; (2) temporal changes in normalized signal intensity values differ among the tibial, middle, and femoral regions; and (3) there are no differences in regional normalized signal intensity values 2 years postoperatively among grafts, repaired ACLs, and contralateral native ACLs. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Magnetic resonance imaging scans were analyzed from patients in a trial comparing ACL reconstruction (n = 35) with bridge-enhanced ACL repair (n = 65). The ACLs were segmented from images acquired at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively and were partitioned into 3 sections along the longitudinal axis (femoral, middle, and tibial). Linear mixed modeling was used to compare location-specific differences in normalized ligament signal intensity among time points (6, 12, and 24 months) and groups (ACL reconstruction, repair, and contralateral native ACL). Results: For grafts, the middle region had a higher mean normalized signal intensity when compared with the femoral region at all time points ( P < .01) but compared with the tibial region only at 6 months ( P < .01). For repaired ACLs, the middle region had a higher mean normalized signal intensity versus the femoral region at all time points ( P < .01) but versus the tibial region only at 6 and 12 months ( P < .04). From 6 to 24 months, the grafts showed the greatest reduction in normalized signal intensity in the femoral and middle regions (vs tibial regions; P < .01), while there were no regional differences in repaired ACLs. At 2 years after surgery, repaired ACLs had a lower normalized signal intensity in the tibial region as compared with reconstructed grafts and contralateral native ACLs ( P < .01). Conclusion: The results suggest that graft remodeling is location specific. Repaired ACLs were more homogeneous, with lower or comparable normalized signal intensity values at 2 years as compared with the contralateral native ACL and reconstructed grafts.

Background: Bridge-enhanced anterior cruciate ligament repair (BEAR) has noninferior patient-reported outcomes when compared with autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) at 2 years. However, the comparison of BEAR and autograft ACLR at earlier time points—including important outcomes such as resolution of knee pain and symptoms, recovery of strength, and return to sport—has not yet been reported. Hypothesis: It was hypothesized that the BEAR group would have higher outcomes on the International Knee Documentation Committee and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, as well as improved muscle strength, in the early postoperative period. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 100 patients aged 13 to 35 years with complete midsubstance anterior cruciate ligament injuries were randomized to receive a suture repair augmented with an extracellular matrix implant (n = 65) or an autograft ACLR (n = 35). Outcomes were assessed at time points up to 2 years postoperatively. Mixed-model repeated-measures analyses were used to compare BEAR and ACLR outcomes. Patients were unblinded after their 2-year visit. Results: Repeated-measures testing revealed a significant effect of group on the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Score ( P = .015), most pronounced at 6 months after surgery (BEAR = 86 points vs ACLR = 78 points; P = .001). There was a significant effect of group on the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Symptoms subscale scores ( P = .010), largely attributed to the higher BEAR scores at the 1-year postoperative time point (88 vs 82; P = .009). The effect of group on hamstring strength was significant in the repeated-measures analysis ( P < .001), as well as at all postoperative time points ( P < .001 for all comparisons). At 1 year after surgery, approximately 88% of the patients in the BEAR group and 76% of the ACLR group had been cleared for return to sport ( P = .261). Conclusion: Patients undergoing the BEAR procedure had earlier resolution of symptoms and increased satisfaction about their knee function, as well as improved resolution of hamstring muscle strength throughout the 2-year follow-up period. Registration: NCT02664545 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier)

Adequate resources are required to rapidly diagnose and treat pediatric musculoskeletal infection (MSKI). The workload MSKI consults contribute to pediatric orthopaedic services is unknown as prior epidemiologic studies are variable and negative work-ups are not included in national discharge databases. The hypothesis was tested that MSKI consults constitute a substantial volume of total consultations for pediatric orthopaedic services across the United States. Study design Eighteen institutions from the Children's ORthopaedic Trauma and Infection Consortium for Evidence-based Study (CORTICES) group retrospectively reviewed a minimum of 1 year of hospital data, reporting the total number of surgeons, total consultations, and MSKI-related consultations. Consultations were classified by the location of consultation (emergency department or inpatient). Culture positivity rate and pathogens were also reported. Results 87,449 total orthopaedic consultations and 7,814 MSKI-related consultations performed by 229 pediatric orthopaedic surgeons were reviewed. There was an average of 13 orthopaedic surgeons per site each performing an average of 154 consultations per year. On average, 9% of consultations were MSKI related and 37% of these consults yielded positive cultures. Finally, a weak inverse monotonic relationship was noted between percent culture positivity and percent of total orthopedic consults for MSKI.

Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging has been used to evaluate the structural integrity of knee joint structures. However, variations in acquisition parameters between scanners pose significant challenges. Understanding the effect of small differences in acquisition parameters for quantitative sequences is vital to the validity of cross‐institutional studies, and for the harmonization of large, heterogeneous datasets to train machine learning models. The study objective was to assess the reproducibility of T2* relaxometry and the constructive interference in steady‐state sequence (CISS) across scanners, with minimal hardware‐necessitated changes to acquisition parameters. It was hypothesized that there would be no significant differences between scanners in anterior cruciate ligament T2* relaxation times and CISS signal intensities (SI). Secondarily, it was hypothesized that differences could be corrected by rescaling the SI distribution to harmonize between scanners. Seven volunteers were scanned on 3T Prisma and Tim Trio scanners (Siemens). Three correction methods were evaluated for T2*: inverse echo time scaling, z‐scoring, and Nyúl histogram matching. For CISS, scans were normalized to cortical bone, scaled by the background noise ratio, and log‐transformed. Before correction, significant mean differences of 6.0 ± 3.2 ms (71.8%; p = 0.02) and 0.49 ± 0.15 units (40.7%; p = 0.02) for T2* and CISS across scanners were observed, respectively. After rescaling, T2* differences decreased to 2.6 ± 2.7 ms (23.9%; p = 0.03), 1.3 ± 2.5 ms (10.9%; p = 0.13), and 1.27 ± 3.0 ms (19.6%; p = 0.40) for inverse echo time, z‐scoring, and Nyúl, respectively, while CISS decreased to 0.01 ± 0.11 units (4.0%; p = 0.87). These findings suggest that small acquisition parameter differences may lead to large changes in T2* and SI values that must be reconciled to compare data across magnets.