[Return to Sport (RTS) After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Which Factors Influence the RTS Decision?] / Rückkehr zum Sport nach Rekonstruktion des vorderen Kreuzbandes ­ Welche Faktoren beeinflussen die Return to Sport-Entscheidung?

BACKGROUND: It is unknown which valid criteria should be considered to justify the decision for return to sport (RTS) following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The research question is whether gender, age, the outcome of the isokinetic maximal strength measurement and the single-leg hop test (quantitative/qualitative) influence the decision for RTS nine months after ACLR. METHODS: This study is a retrospective data analysis. The research question was evaluated with a multiple logistic regression analysis (MLR). The dependent variable, RTS yes/no, is based on the decision of the orthopaedist in charge of treatment nine months (±30 days) after ACLR. The following possible influencing factors were investigated: gender, age, limb symmetry index (LSI) of maximal knee extension and knee flexion strength at 60°/sec., LSI of single-leg hop test and evaluation of knee valgus. RESULTS: Data of 71 patients were included for MLR. The odds ratios (OR) for RTS increased with female gender (OR, 4.808; p=0.035), a higher LSI of maximal strength of knee extension (OR, 1.117; p=0.009) and a higher LSI of the single-leg hop test (OR, 1.125; p=0.020). Age, the LSI of maximal strength of knee flexion and knee valgus had no influence on the RTS decision. CONCLUSION: Gender and the limb symmetry indexes of the maximal strength of knee extension and of the single-leg hop test are associated with RTS nine months after ACLR. These results should be considered to optimise rehabilitation after ACLR.

Dynamic versus static medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction technique in the treatment of recurrent patellar dislocation: a randomized clinical trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: The redislocation rate of conservatively treated patella instability is high. One of the leading surgical strategies is medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction. Over-tensioning is one of the most challenging complications in static medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction as the graft used for reconstruction is isometric and the anatomical MPFL is a mostly dynamic structure. As an alternative to established static reconstruction techniques, dynamic graft techniques have been introduced for stabilizing the patella with the aim of providing a more physiological reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament. To date, data on clinical outcomes are scarce and on biomechanical outcomes of the dynamic MPFL reconstruction are lacking. Here, we present the protocol of a randomized clinical trial for comparing clinical and biomechanical outcomes of dynamic versus static medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction. METHODS: This study is a prospective, single blinded, randomized, multicenter, multimodal (clinical and biomechanical) clinical trial. Patients with recurrent patella dislocation requiring isolated MPFL reconstruction will be recruited and randomized to the dynamic or static reconstruction technique. Participants will be followed up for 2 years with a total of five follow-ups. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging, upright radiographs, surgical reports and patient records will be evaluated, and clinical and functional outcomes will be measured. Patient-reported knee function and anterior knee pain as assessed with the Kujala score will serve as primary outcome. For biomechanical outcome, pre- and postoperative evaluations will be performed to assess isokinetic muscle strength, gait asymmetry, joint kinematics and kinetics, and timing of muscle activity. DISCUSSION: The results of the study will clarify whether the reported surgery success for patella stabilization via dynamic MPFL reconstruction is due to muscle contraction or to the passive tenodesis effect combined with clinical outcome measures. With this study, we will provide much needed information on knee biomechanics after dynamic versus static MPFL reconstruction to provide evidence to support orthopedic surgeons in evidence-based decision-making in their quest for surgical techniques most favorable for their patients. Trial registration The study protocol was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04849130). Registered 19 April 2021, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04849130 .

Plating vs Closed Reduction for Fractures in the Distal Radius in Older Patients: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Distal radius fractures are common and are managed with or without surgery. Current evidence indicates surgical treatment is not superior to nonsurgical treatment at 12 months. Objective: Does surgical treatment for displaced distal radius fractures in patients 60 years or older provide better patient-reported wrist pain and function outcomes than nonsurgical treatment at 24 months? Design, Setting, and Participants: In this secondary analysis of a combined multicenter randomized clinical trial (RCT) and a parallel observational study, 300 patients were screened from 19 centers in Australia and New Zealand. Of these, 166 participants were randomized to surgical or nonsurgical treatment. Participants who declined randomization (n = 134) were included in the parallel observational group with the same treatment options and follow-up. Participants were followed up at 3, 12, and 24 months by a blinded assessor. The 24-month outcomes are reported herein. Data were collected from December 1, 2016, to December 31, 2020, and analyzed from February 4 to October 21, 2021. Interventions: Surgical treatment consisting of open reduction and internal fixation using a volar-locking plate (VLP group) and nonsurgical treatment consisting of closed reduction and cast immobilization (CR group). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was patient-reported function using the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life, wrist pain, patient-reported treatment success, patient-rated bother with appearance, and posttreatment complications. Results: Among the 166 randomized and 134 observational participants (300 participants; mean [SD] age, 71.2 [7.5] years; 269 women [89.7%]), 151 (91.0%) randomized and 118 (88.1%) observational participants were followed up at 24 months. In the RCT, no clinically important difference occurred in mean PRWE scores at 24 months (13.6 [95% CI, 9.1-18.1] points for VLP fixation vs 15.8 [95% CI, 11.3-20.2] points for CR; mean difference, 2.1 [95% CI, -4.2 to 8.5]; P = .50). There were no between-group differences in all other outcomes except for patient-reported treatment success, which favored VLP fixation (33 of 74 [44.6%] in the CR group vs 54 of 72 [75.0%] in the VLP fixation group reported very successful treatment; P = .002). Rates of posttreatment complications were generally low and similar between treatment groups, including deep infection (1 of 76 [1.3%] in the CR group vs 0 of 75 in the VLP fixation group) and complex regional pain syndrome (2 of 76 [2.6%] in the CR group vs 1 of 75 [1.3%] in the VLP fixation group). The 24-month trial outcomes were consistent with 12-month outcomes and with outcomes from the observational group. Conclusions and Relevance: Consistent with previous reports, these findings suggest that VLP fixation may not be superior to CR for displaced distal radius fractures for patient-rated wrist function in persons 60 years or older during a 2-year period. Significantly higher patient-reported treatment success at 2 years in the VLP group may be attributable to other treatment outcomes not captured in this study. Trial Registration: ANZCTR.org Identifier: ACTRN12616000969460.

Surgical Plating vs Closed Reduction for Fractures in the Distal Radius in Older Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The burden of injury and costs of wrist fractures are substantial. Surgical treatment became popular without strong supporting evidence. Objective: To assess whether current surgical treatment for displaced distal radius fractures provided better patient-reported wrist pain and function than nonsurgical treatment in patients 60 years and older. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multicenter randomized clinical trial and parallel observational study, 300 eligible patients were screened from 19 centers in Australia and New Zealand from December 1, 2016, until December 31, 2018. A total of 166 participants were randomized to surgical or nonsurgical treatment and followed up at 3 and 12 months by blinded assessors. Those 134 individuals who declined randomization were included in a parallel observational cohort with the same treatment options and follow-up. The primary analysis was intention to treat; sensitivity analyses included as-treated and per-protocol analyses. Intervention: Surgical treatment was open reduction and internal fixation using a volar-locking plate (VLP). Nonsurgical treatment was closed reduction and cast immobilization (CR). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire score, health-related quality of life, pain, major complications, patient-reported treatment success, bother with appearance, and therapy use. Results: In the 300 study participants (mean [SD] age, 71.2 [7.5] years; 269 [90%] female; 166 [81 VLP and 85 CR] in the randomized clinical trial sample and 134 [32 VLP and 102 CR] in the observational sample), no clinically important between-group difference in 12-month Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation scores (mean [SD] score of 19.8 [21.1] for VLP and 21.5 [24.3] for CR; mean difference, 1.7 points; 95% CI -5.4 to 8.8) was observed. No clinically important differences were found in quality of life, wrist pain, or bother at 3 and 12 months. No significant difference was found in total complications between groups (12 of 84 [14%] for the CR group vs 6 of 80 [8%] for the VLP group; risk ratio [RR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.21-1.33). Patient-reported treatment success favored the VLP group at 12 months (very successful or successful: 70 [89%] vs 57 [70%]; RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.07-1.48; P = .005). There was greater use of postoperative physical therapy in the VLP group (56 [72%] vs 44 [54%]; RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69; P = 0.02). Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found no between-group differences in improvement in wrist pain or function at 12 months from VLP fixation over CR for displaced distal radius fractures in older people. Trial Registration: http://anzctr.org.au identifier: ACTRN12616000969460.

A Combined Randomised and Observational Study of Surgery for Fractures In the distal Radius in the Elderly (CROSSFIRE): a statistical analyses plan.

BACKGROUND: We are performing a combined randomised and observational study comparing internal fixation to non-surgical management for common wrist fractures in older patients. This paper describes the statistical analysis plan. METHODS/DESIGN: A Combined Randomised and Observational Study of Surgery for Fractures In the distal Radius in the Elderly (CROSSFIRE) is a randomised controlled trial comparing two types of usual care for treating wrist fractures in older patients, surgical fixation using volar locking plates and non-surgical treatment using closed reduction and plaster immobilisation. The primary aim of this comparative-effectiveness study is to determine whether surgery is superior to non-surgical treatment with respect to patient-reported wrist function at 12 months post treatment. The secondary outcomes include radiographic outcomes, complication rates and patient-reported outcomes including quality of life, pain, treatment success and cosmesis. Primary analysis will use a two-sample t test and an intention-to-treat analysis using the randomised arm of the study. Statistical analyses will be two-tailed and significance will be determined by p < 0.05. Sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess for differences in intention-to-treat, per-protocol and as-treated analyses. Sensitivity analyses will also be conducted to assess selection bias by evaluating differences in participants between the randomised and observational study arms, and for bias relating to any missing data. An economic analysis will be conducted separately if surgery is shown to provide superior outcomes to a level of clinical significance. DISCUSSION: This statistical analysis plan describes the analysis of the CROSSFIRE study which aims to provide evidence to aid clinical decision-making in the treatment of distal radius fractures in older patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CROSSFIRE was approved by The Hunter New England Human Research Ethics Committee (HNEHREC Reference No: 16/02/17/3.04). Registered on 22 July 2016 with The Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR Number; ACTRN12616000969460 ). This manuscript is based on v.11 of the statistical analysis plan. A copy of v.11, signed by the chief investigator and the senior statistician is kept at the administering institution.

Implant Fracture Analysis of the TFNA Proximal Femoral Nail.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical failure of intramedullary nails is rare. This investigation was prompted by a series of cases of observed breakage of the recently introduced TFNA Proximal Femoral Nailing System (TFN [Trochanteric Fixation Nail]-Advanced; DePuy Synthes) in our region. Laboratory analysis and case data are presented, in contribution to post-market surveillance. METHODS: Medical and imaging records from the 3 public tertiary orthopaedic trauma hospitals in Western Australia were reviewed. Relevant data of patients in whom breakage of the TFNA implant occurred between 2016 and 2018 were collected and analyzed. Laboratory review of retrieved implants was conducted at the Centre for Implant Technology and Retrieval Analysis (CITRA) in Western Australia. RESULTS: A total of 16 cases of TFNA implant breakage were recorded and analyzed. The predominant OTA/AO fracture classification was 31A3 (12 cases, 75%). The reduction quality was good in 10 cases, acceptable in 4 cases, and poor in 2 cases. The mean time to failure (and standard deviation) was 5.0 ± 2.2 months (range, 2.2 to 9.8 months). The treatment modality for the breakage was revision nailing in 11 cases, arthroplasty in 3, and nonoperative management in 2. All nails broke at the proximal screw aperture, with 1 nail additionally breaking at the distal aperture. Of 8 patients treated with a second TFNA implant for nail breakage, 3 (38%) returned with breakage of the revision implant. Laboratory analysis of the broken nails demonstrated a unique fracture pattern, with a stepped propagation pathway. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest series, to our knowledge, of proximal femoral nail breakages in the published English literature and is the first that we are aware of to involve laboratory analysis of the TFNA implant. Changes to the nail design and/or alloy may have contributed to the observed cases of breakage, and this study will be followed by an evaluation of breakage rates in comparison with those of previous generations of nailing systems. We advise close clinical and radiographic surveillance of patients with unstable hip fracture patterns who undergo osteosynthesis with use of a TFNA implant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Mid-term results of revision total hip arthroplasty with an uncemented modular femoral component.

INTRODUCTION: During revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), the surgeon commonly faces deficient proximal femoral bone. In this situation, distal fixation of the prosthesis is required. The aim of the current retrospective study is to assess the clinical and radiographic mid-term outcome of revision total hip arthroplasty using a modular uncemented, tapered, grit-blasted, distal straight stem system. METHODS: This retrospective study included 70 femoral revisions that were performed in 67 patients using the device of interest. All patients were operated on via an extended trochanteric osteotomy. 60 revisions were performed as 1-stage (12 infected) and 10 as 2-stage (all infected) revisions. At 3 months postoperatively and at final follow-up, patients were assessed radiographically for the presence of osteolysis and for distal integration. RESULTS: The mean follow-up time was 4.3 (2.0-7.6) years. 4 patients had a removal of at least 1 prosthetic component. Stem survival for any reason was 92% after 5 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 83%-100%). With aseptic loosening of the stem as the endpoint of interest, survival after 5 years was 96% (95% CI, 88%-100%). A postoperative subsidence rate of 14.7% was found. No perioperative femoral fractures were found in the current patient series. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed excellent mid-term survival and good clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients who had undergone revision THA with a modular uncemented, tapered, straight design.

A combined randomised and observational study of surgery for fractures in the distal radius in the elderly (CROSSFIRE)-a study protocol.

Fractures of the distal radius are common and occur in all age groups. The incidence is high in older populations due to osteoporosis and increased falls risk. Considerable practice variation exists in the management of distal radius fractures in older patients ranging from closed reduction with cast immobilisation to open reduction with plate fixation. Plating is currently the most common surgical treatment. While there is evidence showing no significant advantage for some forms of surgical fixation over conservative treatment, and no difference between different surgical techniques, there is a lack of evidence comparing two of the most common treatments used: closed reduction and casting versus plating. Surgical management involves significant costs and risks compared with conservative management. High-level evidence is required to address practice variation, justify costs and to provide the best clinical outcomes for patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This pragmatic, multicentre randomised comparative effectiveness trial aims to determine whether plating leads to better pain and function and is more cost-effective than closed reduction and casting of displaced distal radius fractures in adults aged 60 years and older. The trial will compare the two techniques but will also follow consenting patients who are unwilling to be randomised in a separate, observational cohort. Inclusion of non-randomised patients addresses selection bias, provides practice and outcome insights about standard care, and improves the generalisability of the results from the randomised trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: CROSSFIRE(Combined Randomised and Observational Study of Surgery for Fractures In the distal Radius in the Elderly) was reviewed and approved by The Hunter New England HREC (HNEHREC Reference No: 16/02/17/3.04). The results of the trial will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be disseminated via various forms of media. Results will be incorporated in clinical recommendations and practice guidelines produced by professional bodies. REGISTRATION: CROSSFIRE has been registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR: ACTRN12616000969460).

Limb shortening osteotomy in a patient with achondroplasia and leg length difference after total hip arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Achondroplasia is the most common reason for disproportionate short stature. Normally, orthopedic limb lengthening procedures must be discussed in the course of this genetic disorder and have been successful in numerous achondroplastic patients in the past. In some cases, the disease may lead to leg length differences with need for surgical correction. CASE REPORT: We report a case of achondroplastic dysplastic coxarthrosis with symptomatic leg length difference after bilateral total hip arthroplasty in a 52-year-old female patient, in which a distal femoral shortening osteotomy was successfully performed. CONCLUSION: Femoral shortening osteotomy is very uncommon in patients with achondroplasia. We conclude, however, that in rare cases it can be indicated and provide the advantage of shorter operation time, less perioperative complications and faster recovery compared to leg lengthening procedures.