Higher return to pre-injury type of sports after revision anterior ligament reconstruction with lateral extra-articular tenodesis compared to without lateral extra-articular tenodesis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the rate of return to pre-injury type of sports (RTS type) in patients after revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) compared to patients after revision ACLR without LET. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients who underwent revision ACLR with an autologous ipsilateral bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft with and without LET were included at least one year after surgery (mean follow-up: 43.9, SD: 29.2 months). All patients filled in a questionnaire about RTS type, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective form (IKDCsubjective), and the Tegner activity score. RESULTS: The RTS type for revision ACLR with LET was 22 of 42 (52%), whereas 11 of 36 (31%) of the patients who underwent revision ACLR without LET returned to the pre-injury type of sport (p = 0.05). No significant differences were found in KOOS subscores, IKDCsubjective, and Tegner activity scores. CONCLUSION: An additional LET increases the rate of RTS type after revision ACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Clinical relevance of joint line obliquity after high tibial osteotomy for medial knee osteoarthritis remains controversial: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature on the association between knee joint line obliquity (KJLO) and clinical outcome after high tibial osteotomy (HTO) for medial knee osteoarthritis and summarize the KJLO cut-off value used when studying this association. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science) on September 2022, updated on February 2023. Eligible studies describing postoperative KJLO in relation to clinical outcome after HTO for medial knee osteoarthritis were included. Nonpatient studies and conference abstracts without full-text were excluded. Two independent reviewers assessed title, abstract and full-text based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The modified Downs and Black checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of each included study. RESULTS: Of the seventeen studies included, three had good methodological quality, thirteen fair quality, and one had poor quality. Conflicting findings were shown on the associations between postoperative KJLO and patient-reported outcome, medial knee cartilage regeneration, and 10-year surgical survival in sixteen studies. Three good-quality studies found no significant differences in lateral knee cartilage degeneration between postoperative medial proximal tibial angle > 95° and < 95°. Joint line orientation angles by the tibial plateau of 4° and 6°, joint line orientation angle by the middle knee joint space of 5°, medial proximal tibial angles of 95° and 98°, and Mikulicz joint line angle of 94° were KJLO cut-off values used in the included studies. CONCLUSION: Based on current evidence, the actual association between postoperative KJLO and clinical consequences after HTO for medial knee osteoarthritis cannot be ascertained. The clinical relevance of KJLO after HTO remains controversial. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Joint line obliquity after lateral closing-wedge high tibial osteotomy does not adversely affect clinical and radiological outcome: a 5-year follow-up study.

PURPOSE: To analyze the association between change in knee joint line obliquity (KJLO) and patient-reported outcome, radiological progression of osteoarthritis, and surgical survival after lateral closing-wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO). METHODS: A cohort of 180 patients treated in one single hospital with lateral closing-wedge HTO was examined. KJLO was defined by the medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA). To assess the association between KJLO and patient-reported outcome, radiological progression of osteoarthritis, and surgical survival, patient groups were defined: I, postoperative MPTA < 95.0°; II, postoperative MPTA ≥ 95.0°; A, MPTA change < 8.0°; B, MPTA change ≥ 8.0°. Propensity score matching was used for between-groups (I and II, A and B) covariates matching, including age, gender, preoperative lower limb alignment, preoperative medial joint space width (mJSW), preoperative Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, wedge size, and postoperative follow-up time. Patient-reported outcome was assessed by the WOMAC questionnaire, radiological progression of osteoarthritis by mJSW and Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade progression (≥ 1) preoperatively and at follow-ups (> 2 years). Failure was defined as revision HTO or conversion to knee arthroplasty. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, groups I and II contained 58 pairs of patients and groups A and B contained 50 pairs. There were no significant differences in postoperative WOMAC score or surgical failure rate between groups I and II or between groups A and B (p > 0.05). However, the postoperative mJSW was significantly lower in group I than group II (3.2 ± 1.6 mm vs 3.9 ± 1.8 mm; p = 0.018) and in group A than group B (3.0 ± 1.7 mm vs 3.7 ± 1.5 mm; p = 0.040). KL grade progression rate was significantly higher in group I than group II (53.4% vs 29.3%; p = 0.008) and in group A than group B (56.0% vs 28.0%; p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Increased KJLO (postoperative MPTA ≥ 95.0°) or MPTA change ≥ 8.0° after lateral closing-wedge HTO does not adversely affect patient-reported outcome, radiological progression of osteoarthritis, or surgical survival at an average 5-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective cohort study.

No difference in 1-year improvement of patient-reported physical functioning and pain between resurfaced and unresurfaced patellae: analysis of 17,224 primary total knee arthroplasties in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Whether or not to resurface the patella during primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. We aimed to investigate the association between patellar resurfacing and patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) improvement 1 year postoperatively in terms of physical functioning and pain following TKA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed an observational study using the Dutch Arthroplasty Register on prospectively collected PROM data (n = 17,224, years 2014-2019). Preoperative and 1-year PROM pain scores (NRS at rest; during activity) and physical functioning scores (KOOS-PS, OKS) were examined. Stratification was performed for cruciate-retaining (CR) and posterior-stabilized (PS) and for the 4 most frequently used TKA implants in the Netherlands (Nexgen, Genesis II, PFC/Sigma, Vanguard) using multivariable linear regression adjusting for age, ASA classification, preoperative general health (EQ VAS), and preoperative PROMs. RESULTS: 4,525 resurfaced and 12,699 unresurfaced patellae in TKA were analyzed. Overall, no significant difference in 1-year PROM improvement was found between the 2 groups. In CR TKAs, resurfacing resulted in less improvement in KOOS-PS and OKS (adjusted difference between groups (B) -1.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.86 to -0.50 and B -0.94, CI -1.57 to -0.31. Fewer improvements for patellar resurfacing in TKA were found for the Genesis TKA on NRS pain at rest (B -0.23, CI-0.40 to -0.06) and Oxford knee score (B -1.61, CI -2.24 to -0.98). CONCLUSION: No significant differences were found in 1-year improvement of physical functioning and pain between TKA with resurfaced and unresurfaced patellae.

Young men are at higher risk of failure after ACL hamstring reconstructions: a retrospective multivariate analysis.

BACKGROUND: Results of ACL reconstruction are influenced by both patient and surgical variables. Until now a significant amount of studies have focused on the influence of surgical technique on primary outcome, often leaving patient variables untouched. This study investigates the combined influence of patient and surgical variables through multivariate analysis. METHODS: Single-center retrospective cohort study. All patients who underwent primary ACL hamstring reconstruction within a 5-year period were included. Patient characteristics (gender, age, height, weight, BMI at time of surgery) and surgical variables (surgical technique, concomitant knee injury, graft diameter, type of femoral and tibial fixation) were collected. Patients were asked about Tegner Activity Scale (TAS), complications and revision surgery. Multivariate logistic regression was used to study risk factors. First graft failure and potential risk factors (patient and surgical) were univariately assessed. Risk factors with a p-value ≤ 0.05 were included in the multivariate model. RESULTS: Six hundred forty-seven primary ACL hamstring reconstructions were included. There were 41 graft failures (failure rate 6.3%). Patient gender, age, height and preoperative TAS had a significant influence on the risk of failure in the univariate analysis. The multivariate analyses showed that age and sex remained significant independent risk factors. Patients with a failed ACL reconstruction were younger (24.3 vs 29.4 years, OR 0.937), with women at a lower risk for failure of their ACL reconstruction (90.2% males vs 9.8% females, female OR 0.123). ACL graft diameter and other surgical variables aren't confounders for graft failure. CONCLUSION: This study shows that patient variables seem to have a larger influence on the failure rate of ACL hamstring reconstructive surgery than surgical variables. Identification of the right patient variables can help us make more informed decisions for our patients and create patient-specific treatment protocols. Young men's higher risk of failure suggests that these patients may benefit from a different reconstruction technique, such as use of a patellar tendon or combined ligament augmentation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective cohort III.

Psychosocial Working Conditions Play an Important Role in the Return-to-Work Process After Total Knee and Hip Arthroplasty.

Purpose Both personal and work-related factors affect return to work (RTW) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA). Little is known about work-related factors associated with the recovery process. This study aimed to determine which work-related factors are associated with time to RTW for both TKA and THA patients. Methods A prospective multicenter survey study was conducted that included patients aged 18-63, had a paid job and were scheduled to undergo primary TKA/THA. Surveys were completed preoperatively, 6 weeks, and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, and included four domains of work-related factors: work characteristics, physical working conditions, psychosocial working conditions and work adjustments. Control variables included age, sex, education, and comorbidity. Time to RTW was defined as days from surgery until RTW. Multivariate linear regression analyses were conducted separately for TKA/THA patients. Results Enrolled were 246 patients (n = 146 TKA, n = 100 THA, median age 56 years, 57% female). Median time to RTW was 79 days (IQR 52.0-146.0). Mainly physical tasks (TKA: B 58.2, 95%CI 9.5-106.8; THA: B 52.1, 95%CI 14.1-90.2) and a combination of physical and mental tasks (TKA: B 50.2, 95%CI 6.4-94.0; THA B 54.0, 95%CI 24.2-83.7) were associated with longer time to RTW after both TKA and THA. More possibilities for personal job development (B - 12.8, 95%CI - 25.3-0.4) and more work recognition (B - 13.2, 95%CI - 25.5 to - 0.9) were significantly associated with shorter time to RTW after TKA. Higher quality of supervisor leadership (B - 14.1, 95%CI - 22.2 to - 6.0) was significantly associated with shorter time to RTW after THA. Conclusion The findings of this study stress the importance of psychosocial working conditions, besides type of job tasks, in RTW after TKA/THA. Further research on work-related factors is needed, as arthroplasty is being performed on an increasingly younger population of knee and hip OA patients for whom participating in work is of critical importance.

Rare primary patellar resurfacing does not lead to more secondary patellar resurfacing: analysis of 70,014 primary total knee arthroplasties in the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Current literature provides no conclusive evidence in support of a patellar resurfacing vs. non-resurfacing regime. Therefore, we compared the incidence of secondary patellar resurfacing among hospitals using 3 different primary patellar resurfacing regimes in the Netherlands. Secondarily we identified patient and surgical characteristics associated with primary patellar resurfacing and secondary patella resurfacing following non-resurfaced primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used data from 2014-2016 of the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. Hospitals were divided into rare (0-10%), selective (>10% to 90%), and usually primary patellar resurfacing (>90%) regimes. We performed a logistic regression analysis for associated factors of primary patellar resurfacing in the selective resurfacing subgroup and for secondary patellar resurfacing in the rare resurfacing subgroup. RESULTS: The rate of primary resurfacing was 5.2% for the rare and 36% for the selective patellar resurfacing regimes, with similar secondary patellar resurfacing (1.1% vs. 0.9%). Predictors for primary patellar resurfacing were being female (OR 1.3) and younger (50-59 years, OR 1.4). The PS prosthesis design had a higher OR (4.1) than the CR design. Younger age (50-59 years, OR 1.5) and PS prosthesis (OR 2.7) were significant predictors of secondary patellar resurfacing. Particular surgical systems have a higher rate of primary and secondary patellar resurfacing. INTERPRETATION: Low rates of secondary patellar resurfacing in hospitals with a rare resurfacing regime indicate that this regime does not lead to more secondary patellar resurfacing then selective resurfacing. In the Dutch orthopedic community primary and secondary patellar resurfacing is associated with using a posterior stabilizing design, being younger, and using particular TKA systems.

Cross-education does not improve early and late-phase rehabilitation outcomes after ACL reconstruction: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Limited evidence suggests that cross-education affords clinical benefits in the initial 8 weeks after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, but it is unknown if such cross-education effects are reproducible and still present in later phases of rehabilitation. We examined whether cross-education, as an adjuvant to standard therapy, would accelerate the rehabilitation up to 26 weeks after ACL reconstruction by attenuating quadriceps weakness. METHODS: ACL-reconstructed patients were randomized into experimental (n = 22) and control groups (n = 21). Both groups received standard care after ACL reconstruction. In addition, the experimental group strength trained the quadriceps of the non-operated leg during weeks 1-12 after surgery (i.e., cross-education). Self-reported knee function was assessed with the Hughston Clinic Knee score as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were maximal quadriceps and hamstring strength and single leg hop distance. All outcomes were measured 29 ± 23 days prior to surgery, as a reference, and at 5-week, 12-week, and 26-week post-surgery. RESULTS: Both groups scored 12% worse on self-reported knee function 5-week post-surgery (95% CI 7-17) and showed 15% improvement 26-week post-surgery (95% CI - 20 to - 10). No cross-education effect was found. Interestingly, males scored 8-10% worse than females at each time point post-surgery. None of 33 secondary outcomes showed a cross-education effect. At 26-week post-surgery, both legs improved maximal quadriceps (5-14%) and hamstring strength (7-18%), and the non-injured leg improved 2% in hop distance. The ACL recovery was not affected by limb dominance and age. CONCLUSION: 26 weeks of standard care improved self-reported knee function and maximal leg strength relative to pre-surgery and adding cross-education did not further accelerate ACL recovery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION: This randomized controlled clinical trial is registered at the Dutch trial register ( http://www.trialregister.nl ) under NTR4395.

Cross-education does not accelerate the rehabilitation of neuromuscular functions after ACL reconstruction: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Cross-education reduces quadriceps weakness 8 weeks after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery, but the long-term effects are unknown. We investigated whether cross-education, as an adjuvant to the standard rehabilitation, would accelerate recovery of quadriceps strength and neuromuscular function up to 26 weeks post-surgery. METHODS: Group allocation was randomized. The experimental (n = 22) and control (n = 21) group received standard rehabilitation. In addition, the experimental group strength trained the quadriceps of the non-injured leg in weeks 1-12 post-surgery (i.e., cross-education). Primary and secondary outcomes were measured in both legs 29 ± 23 days prior to surgery and at 5, 12, and 26 weeks post-surgery. RESULTS: The primary outcome showed time and cross-education effects. Maximal quadriceps strength in the reconstructed leg decreased 35% and 12% at, respectively, 5 and 12 weeks post-surgery and improved 11% at 26 weeks post-surgery, where strength of the non-injured leg showed a gradual increase post-surgery up to 14% (all p ≤ 0.015). Limb symmetry deteriorated 9-10% more for the experimental than control group at 5 and 12 weeks post-surgery (both p ≤ 0.030). One of 34 secondary outcomes revealed a cross-education effect: Voluntary quadriceps activation of the reconstructed leg was 6% reduced for the experimental vs. control group at 12 weeks post-surgery (p = 0.023). Both legs improved force control (22-34%) and dynamic balance (6-7%) at 26 weeks post-surgery (all p ≤ 0.043). Knee joint proprioception and static balance remained unchanged. CONCLUSION: Standard rehabilitation improved maximal quadriceps strength, force control, and dynamic balance in both legs relative to pre-surgery but adding cross-education did not accelerate recovery following ACL reconstruction.

Self-reported functional recovery after reconstruction versus repair in acute anterior cruciate ligament rupture (ROTOR): a randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is today's surgical gold standard for ACL rupture. Although it provides satisfactory results, not all patients return to their previous activity level and moreover, early posttraumatic osteoarthritis is not prevented. As such, a renewed interest has emerged in ACL suture repair combined with dynamic augmentation. Compared to ACL reconstruction, the hypothesized advantages of ACL suture repair are earlier return to sports, reduction of early posttraumatic osteoarthritis and preservation of the patient's native ACL tissue and proprioceptive envelope of the knee. In recent literature, ACL suture repair combined with dynamic augmentation tends to be at least equally effective compared to ACL reconstruction, but no randomized comparative study has yet been conducted. METHODS/DESIGN: This study is a prospective, stratified, block randomized controlled trial. Forty-eight patients with an ACL rupture will be assigned to either a suture repair group with dynamic augmentation and microfracture of the femoral notch, or an ACL reconstruction group with autologous semitendinosis graft and all-inside technique. The primary objective is to investigate the hypothesis that suture repair of a ruptured ACL results in at least equal effectiveness compared with an ACL reconstruction in terms of patient self-reported outcomes (IKDC 2000 subjective scale) 1 year postoperatively. Secondary objectives are to evaluate patient self-reported outcomes (IKDC 2000, KOOS, Tegner, VAS), re-rupture rate, rehabilitation time required for return to daily and sports activities, achieved levels of sports activity, clinimetrics (Rolimeter, LSI, Isoforce) and development of osteoarthritis, at short term (6 weeks, 3, 6 and 9 months and 1 year), midterm (2 and 5 years) and long term (10 years) postoperatively. DISCUSSION: A renewed interest has emerged in ACL suture repair combined with dynamic augmentation in the treatment of ACL rupture. Recent cohort studies show good short- and midterm results for this technique. This randomized controlled trial has been designed to compare the outcome of suture repair of a ruptured ACL, combined with DIS as well as microfracture of the femoral notch, with ACL reconstruction using autologous semitendinosus. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Register NCT02310854 (retrospectively registered on December 1st, 2014).

Superior return to sports rate after patellar tendon autograft over patellar tendon allograft in revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

PURPOSE: After revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), the rate of return to the pre-injury type of sport (RTS type) is low and graft choice might be an important factor. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in outcome after revision ACLR using a patellar tendon allograft compared to an ipsilateral patellar tendon autograft. It was hypothesized that the rate of RTS type using an ipsilateral patellar tendon autograft will be superior to using patellar tendon allograft. METHODS: The design is a retrospective cohort study. Inclusion criteria were patients who underwent revision ACLR with a minimum follow-up of 1 year after revision using a patellar allograft or ipsilateral autograft. Primary study parameter was rate of RTS type. Secondary study parameters were RTS level, subscores of the KOOS, the IKDCsubjective, the Tegner score and reasons for no RTS. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients participated in this study (36 allografts and 46 autografts). In patients with a minimum follow-up of 1 year, rate of RTS type was 51.4% for the patellar tendon allograft and 62.8% for the patellar tendon autograft group (n.s.). In patients with a minimum follow-up rate of 2 years, rate of RTS type was 43.3 versus 75.0%, respectively (p = 0.027). No differences in secondary study parameters were found. In patients with a minimum follow-up of 1 year, rate of RTS type was significantly higher (p = 0.025) for patients without anxiety compared to patients who were anxious to perform certain movements. CONCLUSION: After a minimum follow-up of 2 years, rate of RTS type is in favour of using an ipsilateral patellar tendon autograft when compared to using a patellar tendon allograft in patients undergoing revision ACLR; after a minimum follow-up of 1 year, no significant difference was found. In revision ACLR, the results of this study might influence graft choice in favour of autologous graft when the use of an allograft or autograft patellar tendon is considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Dynamic augmentation restores anterior tibial translation in ACL suture repair: a biomechanical comparison of non-, static and dynamic augmentation techniques.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of objective evidence investigating how previous non-augmented ACL suture repair techniques and contemporary augmentation techniques in ACL suture repair restrain anterior tibial translation (ATT) across the arc of flexion, and after cyclic loading of the knee. The purpose of this work was to test the null hypotheses that there would be no statistically significant difference in ATT after non-, static- and dynamic-augmented ACL suture repair, and they will not restore ATT to normal values across the arc of flexion of the knee after cyclic loading. METHODS: Eleven human cadaveric knees were mounted in a test rig, and knee kinematics from 0° to 90° of flexion were recorded by use of an optical tracking system. Measurements were recorded without load and with 89-N tibial anterior force. The knees were tested in the following states: ACL-intact, ACL-deficient, non-augmented suture repair, static tape augmentation and dynamic augmentation after 10 and 300 loading cycles. RESULTS: Only static tape augmentation and dynamic augmentation restored ATT to values similar to the ACL-intact state directly postoperation, and maintained this after cyclic loading. However, contrary to dynamic augmentation, the ATT after static tape augmentation failed to remain statistically less than for the ACL-deficient state after cyclic loading. Moreover, after cyclic loading, ATT was significantly less with dynamic augmentation when compared to static tape augmentation. CONCLUSION: In contrast to non-augmented ACL suture repair and static tape augmentation, only dynamic augmentation resulted in restoration of ATT values similar to the ACL-intact knee and decreased ATT values when compared to the ACL-deficient knee immediately post-operation and also after cyclic loading, across the arc of flexion, thus allowing the null hypotheses to be rejected. This may assist healing of the ruptured ACL. Therefore, this study would support further clinical evaluation of dynamic augmentation of ACL repair.

Biographical background and origin of common eponymous terms in orthopedic surgery: anatomy and fractures in knee surgery.

An eponym is a person after whom an eponymous term is named. These eponymous terms are easy shorthand in communication between surgeons. Therefore, they are often used and hard to eradicate. We discuss eponymous terms that describe anatomical features and fracture types in the knee. With these terms, an overview of the historical background of the eponym and its current clinical implication is discussed. The eponymous terms discussed are Gerdy tubercle, Pellegrini-Stieda lesion, Segond fracture, Hoffa fracture and fat pad. The meaning of the eponymous term is clarified, the biography of the namegiver given and its contemporary clinical implication discussed. Since eponymous terms are used frequently in inter-collegial discussion and literature, the meaning should be clear for everyone, since otherwise it might give room for misunderstanding.

An anterior cruciate ligament injury does not affect the neuromuscular function of the non-injured leg except for dynamic balance and voluntary quadriceps activation.

PURPOSE: The function of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) patients' non-injured leg is relevant in light of the high incidence of secondary ACL injuries on the contralateral side. However, the non-injured leg's function has only been examined for a selected number of neuromuscular outcomes and often without appropriate control groups. We measured a broad array of neuromuscular functions between legs of ACL patients and compared outcomes to age, sex, and physical activity matched controls. METHODS: Thirty-two ACL-deficient patients (208 ± 145 days post-injury) and active and less-active controls (N = 20 each) participated in the study. We measured single- and multi-joint neuromuscular function in both legs in each group and expressed the overall neuromuscular function in each leg by calculating a mean z-score across all neuromuscular measures. A group by leg MANOVA and ANOVA were performed to examine group and leg differences for the selected outcomes. RESULTS: After an ACL injury, duration (-4.3 h/week) and level (Tegner activity score of -3.9) of sports activity decreased and was comparable to less-active controls. ACL patients showed bilateral impairments in the star excursion balance test compared to both control groups (P ≤ 0.004) and for central activation ratio compared to active controls (P ≤ 0.002). There were between-leg differences within each group for maximal quadriceps and hamstring strength, voluntary quadriceps activation, star excursion balance test performance, and single-leg hop distance (all P < 0.05), but there were no significant differences in quadriceps force accuracy and variability, knee joint proprioception, and static balance. Overall neuromuscular function (mean z-score) did not differ between groups, but ACL patients' non-injured leg displayed better neuromuscular function than the injured leg (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Except for poorer dynamic balance and reduced quadriceps activation, ACL patients had no bilateral neuromuscular deficits despite reductions in physical activity after injury. Therapists can use the non-injured leg as a reference to assess the injured leg's function for tasks measured in the present study, excluding dynamic balance and quadriceps activation. Rehabilitation after an ACL injury should be mainly focused on the injured leg. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

MRI signal intensity of anterior cruciate ligament graft after transtibial versus anteromedial portal technique (TRANSIG): design of a randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: There are two primary surgical techniques to reconstruct the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), transtibial (TT) technique and anteromedial portal (AMP) technique. Currently, there is no consensus which surgical technique elicits the best clinical and functional outcomes. MRI-derived measures of the signal intensity (SI) of the ACL graft have been described as an independent predictor of graft properties. The purpose of this study is to compare the MRI derived SI measurements of the ACL graft one year after ACL reconstruction, in order to compare the outcomes of both the AMP and TT ACL reconstruction technique. METHODS/DESIGN: Thirty-six patients will be included in a randomized controlled trial. Patients who are admitted for primary unilateral ACL reconstruction will be included in the study. Exclusion criteria are a history of previous surgery on the ipsilateral knee, re-rupture of the ipsilateral ACL graft, associated ligamentous injuries or meniscal tear of the ipsilateral knee, unhealthy contralateral knee, contra-indications for MRI and a preference for one of the two surgical techniques and/or orthopaedic surgeon. Primary outcome is MRI Signal intensity ratio (SIR) of the ACL graft. Secondary outcome measures are the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Knee Examination Form,the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) and the Anterior Cruciate Ligament OsteoArthritis Score (ACLOAS). Differences between MRI SIR assessment with the current MRI protocol (proton density weighted imaging protocol) and the additional T2*-weighted gradient-echo protocol will be assessed. DISCUSSION: There is no consensus regarding the TT or AMP ACL reconstruction technique. SI measurements with MRI have been used in other clinical studies for evaluation of the ACL graft and maturation after ACL reconstruction compared to clinical and functional outcomes. This randomized controlled trial has been designed to compare the TT technique with the AMP technique with the use of MRI SI of the graft after ACL reconstruction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry NTR5410 (registered on August 24, 2015).

Braces and orthoses for treating osteoarthritis of the knee.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee can be treated with a knee brace or a foot/ankle orthosis. The main purpose of these aids is to reduce pain, improve physical function and, possibly, slow disease progression. This is the second update of the original review published in Issue 1, 2005, and first updated in 2007. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of braces and foot/ankle orthoses in the treatment of patients with OA of the knee. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE (current contents, HealthSTAR) up to March 2014. We screened reference lists of identified trials and clinical trial registers for ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and controlled clinical trials investigating all types of braces and foot/ankle orthoses for OA of the knee compared with an active control or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials and extracted data. We assessed risk of bias using the 'Risk of bias' tool of The Cochrane Collaboration. We analysed the quality of the results by performing an overall grading of evidence by outcome using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. As a result of heterogeneity of studies, pooling of outcome data was possible for only three insole studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 studies (n = 1356): four studies in the first version, three studies in the first update and six additional studies (n = 529 participants) in the second update. We included studies that reported results when study participants with early to severe knee OA (Kellgren & Lawrence grade I-IV) were treated with a knee brace (valgus knee brace, neutral brace or neoprene sleeve) or an orthosis (laterally or medially wedged insole, neutral insole, variable or constant stiffness shoe) or were given no treatment. The main comparisons included (1) brace versus no treatment; (2) foot/ankle orthosis versus no treatment or other treatment; and (3) brace versus foot/ankle orthosis. Seven studies had low risk, two studies had high risk and four studies had unclear risk of selection bias. Five studies had low risk, three studies had high risk and five studies had unclear risk of detection bias. Ten studies had high risk and three studies had low risk of performance bias. Nine studies had low risk and four studies had high risk of reporting bias.Four studies compared brace versus no treatment, but only one provided useful data for meta-analysis at 12-month follow-up. One study (n = 117, low-quality evidence) showed lack of evidence of an effect on visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores (absolute percent change 0%, mean difference (MD) 0.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.84 to 0.84), function scores (absolute percent change 1%, MD 1.0, 95% CI -2.98 to 4.98) and health-related quality of life scores (absolute percent change 4%, MD -0.04, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.04) after 12 months. Many participants stopped their initial treatment because of lack of effect (24 of 60 participants in the brace group and 14 of 57 participants in the no treatment group; absolute percent change 15%, risk ratio (RR) 1.63, 95% CI 0.94 to 2.82). The other studies reported some improvement in pain, function and health-related quality of life (P value ≤ 0.001). Stiffness and treatment failure (need for surgery) were not reported in the included studies.For the comparison of laterally wedged insole versus no insole, one study (n = 40, low-quality evidence) showed a lower VAS pain score in the laterally wedged insole group (absolute percent change 16%, MD -1.60, 95% CI -2.31 to -0.89) after nine months. Function, stiffness, health-related quality of life, treatment failure and adverse events were not reported in the included study.For the comparison of laterally wedged versus neutral insole after pooling of three studies (n = 358, moderate-quality evidence), little evidence was found of an effect on numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores (absolute percent change 1.0%, MD 0.1, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.65), Western Ontario-McMaster Osteoarthritis Scale (WOMAC) stiffness scores (absolute percent change 0.1%, MD 0.07, 95% CI -4.96 to 5.1) and WOMAC function scores (absolute percent change 0.9%, MD 0.94, 95% CI - 2.98 to 4.87) after 12 months. Evidence of an effect on health-related quality of life scores (absolute percent change 1.0%, MD 0.01, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.03) was lacking in one study (n = 179, moderate-quality evidence). Treatment failure and adverse events were not studied for this comparison in the included studies.Data for the comparison of laterally wedged insole versus valgus knee brace could not be pooled. After six months' follow-up, no statistically significant difference was noted in VAS pain scores (absolute percent change -2.0%, MD -0.2, 95% CI -1.15 to 0.75) and WOMAC function scores (absolute percent change 0.1%, MD 0.1, 95% CI -7.26 to 0.75) in one study (n = 91, low-quality evidence); however both groups showed improvement. Stiffness, health-related quality of life, treatment failure and adverse events were not reported in the included studies for this comparison. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence was inconclusive for the benefits of bracing for pain, stiffness, function and quality of life in the treatment of patients with medial compartment knee OA. On the basis of one laterally wedged insole versus no treatment study, we conclude that evidence of an effect on pain in patients with varus knee OA is lacking. Moderate-quality evidence shows lack of an effect on improvement in pain, stiffness and function between patients treated with a laterally wedged insole and those treated with a neutral insole. Low-quality evidence shows lack of an effect on improvement in pain, stiffness and function between patients treated with a valgus knee brace and those treated with a laterally wedged insole. The optimal choice for an orthosis remains unclear, and long-term implications are lacking.

Do laterally wedged insoles or valgus braces unload the medial compartment of the knee in patients with osteoarthritis?

BACKGROUND: The results of conservative treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA) are generally evaluated in epidemiological studies with clinical outcome measures as primary outcomes. Biomechanical evaluation of orthoses shows that there are potentially beneficial biomechanical changes to joint loading; however, evaluation in relation to clinical outcome measures in longitudinal studies is needed. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked (1) is there an immediate effect on gait in patients using a laterally wedged insole or valgus knee brace; (2) is there a late (6 weeks) effect; and (3) is there a difference between subgroups within each group with respect to patient compliance, body mass index, and OA status? METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of data from a previous randomized controlled trial of patients with early medial knee OA. A total of 91 patients were enrolled in that trial, and 73 (80%) completed it after 6 months. Of the enrolled patients, 80 (88%) met prespecified inclusion criteria for analysis in the present study. The patients were randomized to an insole or brace. Gait was analyzed with and without wearing the orthosis (insole or brace) at baseline and after 6 weeks. Measurements were taken of the knee adduction moment, ground reaction force, moment arm, walking speed, and toe-out angle. Data were analyzed with regression analyses based on an intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: A mean reduction of 4% (±10) (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.147 to -0.03, p=0.003) of the peak knee adduction moment and 4% (±13) (95% CI, -0.009 to -0.001, p=0.01) of the moment arm at baseline was observed in the insole group when walking with an insole was compared with walking without an insole. A mean reduction of 1% (±10) (95% CI, -0.002 to -0.001, p=0.001) of the peak knee adduction moment and no reduction of the moment arm were measured after 6 weeks. No reduction of knee adduction moment, moment arm, or ground reaction force was seen in the brace group at baseline and after 6 weeks. Subgroup analysis showed no differences in biomechanical effect for obesity, stage of OA, and whether patients showed a clinical response to the treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Laterally wedged insoles unload the medial compartment only at baseline in patients with varus alignment and by an amount that might not be clinically important. No biomechanical alteration was seen after 6 weeks of wearing the insole. Valgus brace therapy did not result in any biomechanical alteration. Taken together, this study does not show a clinically relevant biomechanical effect of insole and brace therapy in patients with varus medial knee OA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Osteotomy for treating knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with unicompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee can be treated with an osteotomy. The goal of an osteotomy is to unload the diseased compartment of the knee. This is the second update of the original review published in The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of an osteotomy for treating patients with knee osteoarthritis, including the following main outcomes scores: treatment failure, pain and function scores, health-related quality of life, serious adverse events, mortality and reoperation rate. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE (Current Contents, HealthSTAR) were searched until November 2013 for this second update. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and controlled clinical trials comparing an osteotomy with other treatments for patients with unicompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias using the domains recommended in the 'Risk of bias' tool of The Cochrane Collaboration. The quality of the results was analysed by performing overall grading of evidence by outcome using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. MAIN RESULTS: Eight new studies were included in this update, for a total of 21 included studies involving 1065 people.In four studies, the randomised sequence was adequately generated and clearly described. In eight studies, allocation concealment was adequately generated and described. In four studies, the blinding procedures were sufficient. In six studies, incomplete outcome data were not adequately addressed. Furthermore, in 11 studies, the selective outcome reporting item was unclear because no study protocol was provided.Follow-up of studies comparing different osteotomy techniques was too short to measure treatment failure, which implicates revision to a knee arthroplasty.Four studies evaluated a closing wedge high tibial osteotomy (CW-HTO) with another high tibial osteotomy (aHTO). Based on these studies, the CW-HTO group had 1.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) -7.7% to 4.2%; low-quality evidence) more pain compared with the aHTO group; this finding was not statistically significant. Pooled function in the CW-HTO group was 0.5% (95% CI -3.8% to 2.8%; low-quality evidence) higher compared with the aHTO group; this finding was not statistically significant. No data on health-related quality of life and mortality were presented.Serious adverse events were reported in only four studies and were not significantly different (low-quality evidence) between groups. The reoperation rate were scored as early hardware removal because of pain and pin track infection due to the external fixator. Risk of reoperation was 2.6 (95% CI 1.5 to 4.5; low-quality evidence) times higher in the aHTO group compared with the CW-HTO group, and this finding was statistically significant.The quality of evidence for most outcomes comparing different osteotomy techniques was downgraded to low because of the numbers of available studies, the numbers of participants and limitations in design.Two studies compared high tibial osteotomy versus unicompartmental knee replacement. Treatment failure and pain and function scores were not different between groups after a mean follow-up of 7.5 years. The osteotomy group reported more adverse events when compared with the unicompartmental knee replacement group, but the difference was not statistically significant. No data on health-related quality of life and mortality were presented.No study compared an osteotomy versus conservative treatment.Ten included studies compared differences in perioperative or postoperative conditions after high tibial osteotomy. In most of these studies, no statistically significant differences in outcomes were noted between groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The conclusion of this update did not change: Valgus high tibial osteotomy reduces pain and improves knee function in patients with medial compartmental osteoarthritis of the knee. However, this conclusion is based on within-group comparisons, not on non-operative controls. No evidence suggests differences between different osteotomy techniques. No evidence shows whether an osteotomy is more effective than alternative surgical treatment such as unicompartmental knee replacement or non-operative treatment. So far, the results of this updated review do not justify a conclusion on benefit of specific high tibial osteotomy technique for knee osteoarthritis.

High tibial osteotomy: closed wedge versus combined wedge osteotomy.

BACKGROUND: High tibial osteotomy is a common procedure to treat symptomatic osteoarthritis of the medial compartment of the knee with varus alignment. This is achieved by overcorrecting the varus alignment to 2-6° of valgus. Various high tibial osteotomy techniques are currently used to this end. Common procedures are medial opening wedge and lateral closing wedge tibial osteotomies. The lateral closing wedge technique is a primary stable correction with a high rate of consolidation, but has the disadvantage of bone loss and change in tibial condylar offset. The medial opening wedge technique does not result in any bone loss but needs to be fixated with a plate and may cause tibial slope and medial collateral ligament tightening. A relatively new technique, the combined valgus high tibial osteotomy, claims to include the advantages of both techniques without bone loss. Aim of this prospective randomized trial is to compare the lateral closing wedge with the combined wedge osteotomy in patients with symptomatic varus osteoarthritis of the knee. METHODS/DESIGN: A group of 110 patients with osteoarthritis of the medial compartment of the knee with 6-12° varus malalignment over 18 years of age are recruited to participate a randomized controlled trial. Patients are randomized to undergo a high tibial osteotomy, with either a lateral closing wedge technique or a combined wedge osteotomy technique. Primary outcome measure is achievement of an overcorrection of 4° valgus after one year of surgery, assessed by measuring the hip-knee-ankle angle. Secondary objectives are radiological scores and anatomical changes after high tibial osteotomy; pain, functional scores and quality of life will also be compared. DISCUSSION: Combined high tibial osteotomy modification avoids metaphyseal tibial bone loss, decreasing transposition of the tibial condyle and shortening of the patellar tendon after osteotomy, even in case of great correction. The clinical results of the combined wedge osteotomy technique are very promising. Hypothesis is that the combined wedge osteotomy technique will achieve more accurate overcorrection of varus malalignment with fewer anatomical changes of the proximal tibia after one year. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Registry (Netherlands trial register): NTR3898.

No difference in gait between posterior cruciate retention and the posterior stabilized design after total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: In the present study, knee joint kinematics (e.g. knee flexion/extension) and kinetics (e.g. knee flexion moments) are assessed after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) between patients implanted with either a unilateral posterior stabilized (PS) and a posterior cruciate-retaining (PCR) design. It was hypothesized that maximum knee flexion during the loading response of the stance phase is greater in patients implanted with a PS design than in patients with a PCR design. Secondarily, it was hypothesized that patients with a PS design show decreased knee flexion moments during loading, compared with patients implanted with a PCR design. METHODS: This study examined two groups of TKA patients: one group (n = 12) with a PS design in which the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) was sacrificed and the other (n = 9) with a PCR design. Gait analysis was used in level walking before and 6-9 months after surgery, to assess knee joint kinematics and kinetics during the loading response of the stance phase. RESULTS: No significant differences in maximum knee flexion between the two groups were found during the loading response of the stance phase. No significant differences in knee flexion moments were found either. Although in both groups knee flexion moments increased postoperatively, this was not statistically significant. In the contralateral (nonimplanted) knees, all mean knee flexion moments decreased postoperatively for both groups, yet this was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: The present gait analysis study showed no differences in kinematics and kinetics between the PS and the PCR TKP design. This might suggest that surgeons do not necessarily need to substitute the PCL by a PS design during TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective comparative study, Level II.