These results suggest that primary ACLRs using nonirradiated allografts may provide superior clinical outcomes than those using low-dose (<2.5 Mrad) irradiated grafts.

Background The burden of orthopaedic trauma in the developing world is substantial and disproportionate. SIGN Fracture Care International is a nonprofit organization that has developed and made available to surgeons in resourcelimited settings an intramedullary interlocking nail for use in the treatment of femoral and tibial fractures. Instrumentation also is donated with the nail. A prospectively populated database collects information on all procedures performed using this nail. Given the challenging settings and numerous surgeons with varied experience, it is important to document adequate alignment and union using the device. Questions/purposes The primary aim of this research was to assess the adequacy of operative reduction of closed diaphyseal femur fractures using the SIGN interlocking intramedullary nail based on radiographic images available in the SIGN database. The secondary aims were to assess correlations between postoperative alignment and several associated variables, including fracture location in the diaphysis, degree of fracture site comminution, and time to surgery. The tertiary aim was to assess the functionality of the SIGN database for radiographic analyses. Methods A review of the prospectively populated SIGN database was performed for patients with a diaphyseal femur fracture treated with the SIGN nail, which at the time of the study totaled 32,362 patients. After study size calculations, a random number generator was used to select 500 femur fractures for analysis. Exclusion criteria included open fractures and those without radiographs during the early postoperative period. The following information was recorded: location of the fracture in the diaphysis; fracture classification (AO/Orthopaedic Trauma Association [OTA] classification); degree of comminution (Winquist and Hansen classification); time from injury to surgery; and patient demographics. Measurements of alignment were obtained from the AP and lateral radiographs with malalignment defined as deformity in either the sagittal or coronal plane greater than 5°. Measurements were made manually by the four study authors using onscreen protractor software and interobserver reliability was assessed. Results The frequency of malalignment greater than 5°o bserved on postoperative radiographs was 51 of 501 (10%; 95% CI, 6.5-11.5), and malalignment greater than Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ®A Publication of The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 10°occurred in eight of 501 (1.6%) of the femurs treated with this nail. Fracture location in the proximal or distal diaphysis was strongly correlated with risk of malalignment, with an odds ratio (OR) of 3.7 (95% CI, 1.5-9.3) for distal versus middle diaphyseal fractures and an OR of 4.7 (95% CI, 1.9-11.5) for proximal versus middle fractures (p \ 0.001). Time from injury to surgery greater than 4 weeks also was strongly correlated with risk of malalignment (p \ 0.001). Inherent fracture stability, based on fracture site comminution as per the Winquist and Hansen clas...

Total joint arthroplasty can be associated with major blood loss and require subsequent blood transfusions for postoperative anemia. Measures to effectively and safely decrease blood loss and reduce the need for blood transfusions would help improve patient safety and lower health care costs. A possible pharmacological option to reduce surgical blood loss in total joint arthroplasty is the use of tranexamic acid. Abundant literature has shown that intravenous and/or topical administration of tranexamic acid is effective in reducing blood loss and blood transfusions, with no increased risk of venous thromboembolic events or other complications.

Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Objectives: Osteochondral lesions (OCLs) are commonly seen in the ankle and knee joints, and present difficult challenges for treatment. Evaluating the effectiveness of a treatment is dependent on how well constructed, content specific, reliable, and responsive the outcome measures used are. Currently, a considerable variety of outcome scores are used to assess the treatment effect of OCLs. The purpose of this study was to compare the frequency of validated outcome scores utilized in the ankle versus knee literature. Methods: A computerized search of multiple electronic databases was performed for all clinical studies from 2011 to 2020 assessing treatment outcome of ankle and knee OCLs. Eligible studies were independently screened by two reviewers. Outcome scores used in each eligible study were recorded and the overall frequency calculated. Correlation coefficients were used to determine if there was an association between use of validated outcome score with journal impact factor, publication year, or study level of evidence. Results: A total of 75 eligible ankle OCL studies were identified, with 27 different outcome scores utilized. The most frequently used scores were the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Clinical Rating Systems (47.7%), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (34.4%), and Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) (6.3%). Validated outcome scores were used in only 14.7% of all ankle OCL studies. There was no correlation between the use of validated outcome scores and journal impact factor (p=0.72), publication year (p=0.45), or level of evidence (p=0.66). A total of 239 eligible knee OCL studies were identified, with 34 different outcome scores utilized. The most frequently used scores were the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee forms (IKDC) (33.2%), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) (19.8%), and Tegner Activity Scale (TAS) (17.1%). Validated outcome scores were utilized in 87.4% of all knee OCL studies, compared to 14.7% in ankle OCL studies (p<0.001). There was no correlation between the use of validated outcome scores and journal impact factor (p=0.19), publication year (p=0.58), or level of evidence (p=0.62). Conclusions: Validated outcome scores were more frequently utilized in knee OCL studies compared to ankle OCL studies. Nearly half the ankle OCL studies utilized the AOFAS score despite the score not being shown to be valid or reliable. The extremely low frequency of validated scores used within the ankle literature may limit how well treatment effectiveness in ankle OCLs is appropriately evaluated.