Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction (ACLR) and Lateral Extra-articular Tenodesis through the Modified Lemaire Technique versus Isolated ACLR: A Meta-analysis of Clinical Outcomes.

Objective Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) has been proposed to resolve rotatory instability following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of ACLR and ACLR with LET using the modified Lemaire technique. Materials and Methods We performed a meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) staement. The literature search was performed on the PubMed, EBSCOHost, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and WileyOnline databases. The data extracted from the studies included were the study characteristics, the failure rate (graft or clinical failure) as the primary outcome, and the functional score as the secondary outcome. Comparisons were made between the patients who underwent isolated ACLR (ACLR group) and those submitted to ACLR and LET through the modified Lemaire technique (ACLR + LET group). Results A total of 5 studies including 797 patients were evaluated. The ACLR + LET group presented a lower risk of failure and lower rate of rerupture than the ACLR group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.44; 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.26 to 0.75; I 2 = 9%; p = 0.003). The ACLR + LET group presented higher scores on the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) regarding the following outcomes: pain, activities of daily living (ADL), sports, and quality of life (QOL), with mean differences of 0.20 (95%CI: 0.10 to 0.30; I 2 = 0%; p < 0.0001), -0.20 (95%CI: -0.26 to -0.13; I 2 = 0%; p < 0.00001), 0.20 (95%CI: 0.02 to 0.38; I 2 = 0%; p = 0.03), and 0.50 (95%CI: 0.29 to 0.71; I 2 = 0%; p < 0.00001) respectively when compared with the ACLR group. Conclusion Adding LET through the modified Lemaire technique to ACLR may improve knee stability because of the lower rate of graft rerupture and the superiority in terms of clinical outcomes. Level of Evidence I.

Replantation using groin flap in thirty-four years old male with traumatic total degloving of little finger: A case report.

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Degloving injuries of the hand or fingers have a devastating presentation which challenges a surgeon to conduct reconstruction in order to resurface the naked finger and recover its function. The gold standard treatment for degloving injuries is using skin grafting and flap. The pedicle of groin flap is based on superficial circumflex iliac artery. It is one of standard flaps used in reconstruction of degloving fingers. In this study, we use groin flap for reconstruction of traumatic total degloving little finger. PRESENTATION OF CASE: This is a case of 34-years old man with total degloving of his left little finger because stuck inside running cutting machine in a clothes factory. The patient was then brought to the Hasan Sadikin General Hospital. The patient underwent thorough debridement, preparation of the donor site, and groin flap. After a week, the wound was in good condition with no signs of infection. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: The groin or skin flap is pedicled and vascularized by superficial circumflex artery. It can be considered as an option for treatment of single finger degloving wound because of its compliant nature and vascularization reliability. Despite this, it often results in bulky appearance which needs to be reconstructed later. THE CONCLUSION: Groin flaps are an appropriate method in managing degloving little fingers and are still cosmetically acceptable.