Patella is rarely resurfaced during primary total knee arthroplasty in clinical trials conducted in Greece: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to report the approach of Greek surgeons regarding patellar management and provide the outcomes and the rate of the need for secondary patella resurfacing. METHODS: Following the PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Scopus, and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were accessed in January 2024. Clinical studies evaluating the outcomes of patients undergoing primary TKA were considered eligible for this systematic review if the following predefined criteria were fulfilled: (1) published in English, (2) were conducted in Greece, and had a minimum of 2-year follow-up. The methodological quality and publication bias were assessed using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score (mCMS) and ROBIS tool, respectively. Data was presented in tables using absolute values from individual studies. Pooled data were presented as means, ranges, and percentages. RESULTS: Six clinical studies with a total of 1084 TKAs were included. Four studies were retrospectives, and two studies were prospective. Patella was only resurfaced in 0.6% of total TKAs. TKA without patellar resurfaced, which resulted in an improvement in functional outcome. Among studies, the overall need for revision incidence was 7.6% (68 out of 892 TKAs). Additionally, Aseptic loosening (2.4%) was the most common reason for revision due to patellofemoral joint complications, followed by secondary patellar resurfacing (2.1%) and deep infection (1.3%). The mean mCMS demonstrated a fair methodological quality level, and the ROBIS toll a low risk of bias in all four domains. CONCLUSION: The available evidence supports that Greek surgeons mainly do not resurface the patella. However, patellar non-resurfacing yields good functional outcomes and presents relatively low revision rates for secondary patellar resurfacing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

The Lateral-W Construct: An Anatomical Variant of the Dorsal Wrist Ligaments.

Background The dorsal intercarpal ligament (DIC) is an elegant dorsal stabilizer of the proximal carpal row, including the scaphoid's proximal pole and scapholunate joint. Along with the dorsal radiocarpal (DRC) ligament, it acts as a dorsal radioscaphoid stabilizer, with dynamism due to its ability to modify its length up to threefold by changing the angles between its V-shaped bundle morphology. The DIC ligament consistently originates from the dorsal tubercle of the triquetrum on the ulnar side. It spans transversely, attaching to the dorsal groove of the scaphoid (97-100%), lunate (75-90%), and proximal rim of the trapezium (12.5-50%), and overlapping the lunotriquetral interosseous ligament and the scapholunate interosseous ligament. Together with the DRC, Viegas et al (Viegas SF, Yamaguchi S, Boyd NL, Patterson RM. The dorsal ligaments of the wrist: anatomy, mechanical properties, and function. J Hand Surg Am 1999;24(3):456-468) proposed that this ligament complex should be called the "lateral-V construct." Anatomical Variant The authors present a unique type C variant of the DIC ligament, showing a distinct thick bundle directed at the dorsal aspect of the second metacarpal base that thus creates a "lateral-W construct." This dorsal triquetro-metacarpal 2 (dTqMC2) ligament acts as restraint to the body of the capitate and will provide enhanced stability of the dorsal midcarpal joint by limiting dorsal translation of the capitate in relation to the lunate. Clinical Relevance Our finding may contribute to the increasing knowledge of the dorsal ligament complex and its role in dorsal midcarpal instability, as well as surgical repair techniques.

Short-term outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with or without lateral tenodesis or anterolateral ligament reconstruction: a retrospective cohort.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of ACL reconstruction (ACLR) alone, ACLR with lateral tenodesis, and ACL and ALL reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of prospectively collected data on all ACL procedures was performed at Aspetar Specialized Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Hospital between January 2020 and January 2021. Patients were treated with ACLR alone, ACLR with lateral tenodesis, or ACLR with ALL reconstruction. The primary outcome was the subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (sIKDC) score. The secondary outcomes were the ACL Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI) scores, pivot shift grade, subjective knee stability, and subjective pain on activity. RESULTS: A total of 100 cases were included. The most common technique was ACLR with lateral tenodesis (42%), followed by ACLR alone (38%) and ACL with ALL reconstruction (20%). The mean age was 28.15 years (15-60), and 94% of the patients were males. Meniscal procedures were more frequent in the ACLR alone group (65.8%). There was no association between subjective stability, sIKDC, ACL-RSI, and pivot shift grade and the three ACLR techniques while adjusting for age, sex, and concomitant meniscus procedures at six weeks, 12 weeks, six months, and nine months. However, there was a significant decrease in postoperative flexion in the ACL and ALL reconstruction group by a mean of 22° (95% CI - 40.7 - 3.4; P = 0.02) at 6 weeks compared to ACLR alone, which was not evident on later follow-ups. CONCLUSION: ACLR with/without lateral augmentation procedures yields similar subjective IKDC, ACL-RSI, pivot shift grade, and subjective knee instability at short-term follow-up. Therefore, lateral extra-articular augmentation procedures are safe to be performed.