Purpose The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the reparticipation in sport at mid-term follow up in athletes who underwent biologic treatment of chondral defects in the knee and compare the rates amongst different biologic procedures. Methods A search of PubMed/Medline and Embase was performed in May 2020 in keeping with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The criteria for inclusion were observational, published research articles studying the outcomes and rates of participation in sport following biologic treatments of the knee with a minimum mean/median follow up of 5 years. Interventions included microfracture, osteochondral autograft transfer (OAT), autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI), matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI), osteochondral allograft, or platelet rich plasma (PRP) and peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC). A random effects model of head-to-head evidence was used to determine rates of sporting participation following each intervention. Results There were twenty-nine studies which met the inclusion criteria with a total of 1276 patients (67% male, 33% female). The mean age was 32.8 years (13–69, SD 5.7) and the mean follow up was 89 months (SD 42.4). The number of studies reporting OAT was 8 (27.6%), ACI was 6 (20.7%), MACI was 7 (24.1%), microfracture was 5 (17.2%), osteochondral allograft was 4 (13.8%), and one study (3.4%) reported on PRP and PBSC. The overall return to any level of sport was 80%, with 58.6% returning to preinjury levels. PRP and PBSC (100%) and OAT (84.4%) had the highest rates of sporting participation, followed by allograft (83.9%) and ACI (80.7%). The lowest rates of participation were seen following MACI (74%) and microfracture (64.2%). Conclusions High rates of re-participation in sport are sustained for at least 5 years following biologic intervention for chondral injuries in the knee. Where possible, OAT should be considered as the treatment of choice when prolonged participation in sport is a priority for patients. However, MACI may achieve the highest probability of returning to the same pre-injury sporting level. Level of evidence IV

Background: The physical and mental health benefits of golf are well recognized, and as a moderate-intensity activity, it is an ideal sport for patients after joint arthroplasty. Purpose: To assess the rate and timing of returning to golf and the factors associated with these after hip, knee, or shoulder arthroplasty. Study Design: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A search of PubMed and Medline was performed in March 2021 in line with the 2009 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. Search terms included sport, golf, and arthroplasty. The criterion for inclusion was any published research article studying return to golf after arthroplasty. Random-effects modeling was used to measure rates of returning to golf for each type of arthroplasty. Results: A total of 23 studies were included for review. All studies were retrospective in their methodology. The mean age of patients was 66.8 years (SD, 3.37). Four studies reported on hip arthroplasty, 6 on knee arthroplasty, and 13 on shoulder arthroplasty. Among 13 studies, the mean rate of returning to golf was 80% (95% CI, 70%-89.9%). Hip, knee, and shoulder arthroplasty had mean return rates of 90% (95% CI, 82%-98%), 70% (95% CI, 39%-100%), and 80% (95% CI, 68%-92%), respectively. Among 9 studies, the mean time to return to golf was 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.2-6). Change in handicap was reported in 8 studies (35%) with a mean change of −0.1 (95% CI, –2.4 to +2.2). There were no studies presenting factors associated with return to golf. Conclusion: This is the first meta-analysis of returning to golf after joint arthroplasty. The study reports a high rate of returning to golf, which was greatest after hip arthroplasty. However, the study highlights the paucity of prospective data on demographic, surgical, and golf-specific outcomes after arthroplasty. Future prospective studies are required to eliminate response bias and accurately capture golf and patient-specific outcomes.

Aims The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the rates of union for vascularized versus non-vascularized grafting techniques in the operative management of scaphoid nonunion. Secondary aims were to determine the effect of the fixation techniques used, the source of grafting, as well as the influence of fracture location (proximal pole) and avascular necrosis (AVN). Methods A search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase was performed in June 2021 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses statement and registered using the PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews. The primary outcome was union rate. Results There were 78 studies that met the inclusion criteria with a total of 7,671 patients (87.8% male, 12.2% female). The mean age was 27.9 years (SD 3.8) and the mean follow-up was 30.9 months (SD 25.9). The mean union rate was 88.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 85.0 to 92.5) for non-vascularized grafts versus 87.5% (95% CI 82.8 to 92.2) for vascularized grafts (p = 0.685). Pooled analysis of trial data alone found a mean union rate of 82.4% (95% CI 66.9% to 97.9%) for non-vascularized grafts and 89.4% (95% CI 84.1% to 94.7%) for vascularized grafts (p = 0.780). No significant difference was observed in union rates between any of the fixation techniques used in the studies (p = 0.502). Distal radius and iliac crest graft source had comparable mean union rates (86.9% (95% CI 83.1 to 90.7) vs 87.6% (95% CI 82.2 to 92.9); p = 0.841). Studies that excluded patients with both proximal pole fractures and AVN (n = 14) had a mean union rate of 96.5% (95% CI 94.2 to 98.9) that was significantly greater than the mean union rate of 86.8% (95% CI 83.2 to 90.4) observed in the remaining studies (p < 0.001). Conclusion Current evidence suggests vascularized bone grafting does not yield significantly superior results to non-vascularized grafting in scaphoid nonunion management. However, potential selection bias lessens the certainty of these findings. The fixation type or source of the graft used was not found to influence union rates either. Sufficiently designed and powered prospective randomized controlled trials in this area are needed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(5):549–558.

Purpose Frailty is a common clinical syndrome affecting hip fracture patients. Recognising and accurately assessing frailty status is important in clinical and research settings. The Rockwood Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a commonly used instrument and demonstrates a strong correlation with mortality and length of hospital admission following hip fracture. What is not understood, however, is the validity of retrospectively assigned CFS scores in hip fracture patients. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of retrospective non-orthogeriatrician assigned CFS scores in hip fracture patients. Methods Hip fracture patients from a single major trauma centre were assessed and CFS scores were assigned prospectively by non-orthogeriatric clinicians (n = 57). A subset of these patients were also assigned a prospective CFS score by a specialist orthogeriatrician (n = 27). Two separate blinded observers (non-orthogeriatric clinicians) assigned CFS scores retrospectively using electronic patient records alone. Agreement and precision was examined using the Bland–Altman plot, accuracy was assessed using R2 statistic and inter-rater reliability was assessed using quadratic weighted Cohen’s kappa. Results Seventy percent of the cohort were female with an average age of 83. Agreement was high between prospective non-orthogeriatrician assigned CFS scores and retrospective non-orthogeriatrician assigned CFS scores, with a low bias (0.046) and good accuracy (R2 = 73%). Good agreement was also seen in comparisons between prospective orthogeriatrician assigned CFS scores versus retrospective non-orthogeriatrician assigned scores, with a low bias (0.23) and good accuracy (R2 = 78%). Good inter-rater reliability was seen between blinded observers with a quadratic weighted Cohen’s kappa of 0.76. Conclusions Retrospective CFS scores assigned by non-orthogeriatricians are a valid means of assessing frailty status in hip fracture patients. However, our results suggest a tendency for non-orthogeriatricians to marginally overestimate frailty status when assigning CFS scores retrospectively. Level of evidence 3.

No abstract