Multiligament knee injury (MLKI): an expert consensus statement on nomenclature, diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation.

Multiligament knee injuries (MLKIs) represent a broad spectrum of pathology with potentially devastating consequences. Currently, disagreement in the terminology, diagnosis and treatment of these injuries limits clinical care and research. This study aimed to develop consensus on the nomenclature, diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation strategies for patients with MLKI, while identifying important research priorities for further study. An international consensus process was conducted using validated Delphi methodology in line with British Journal of Sports Medicine guidelines. A multidisciplinary panel of 39 members from 14 countries, completed 3 rounds of online surveys exploring aspects of nomenclature, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation and future research priorities. Levels of agreement (LoA) with each statement were rated anonymously on a 5-point Likert scale, with experts encouraged to suggest modifications or additional statements. LoA for consensus in the final round were defined 'a priori' if >75% of respondents agreed and fewer than 10% disagreed, and dissenting viewpoints were recorded and discussed. After three Delphi rounds, 50 items (92.6%) reached consensus. Key statements that reached consensus within nomenclature included a clear definition for MLKI (LoA 97.4%) and the need for an updated MLKI classification system that classifies injury mechanism, extent of non-ligamentous structures injured and the presence or absence of dislocation. Within diagnosis, consensus was reached that there should be a low threshold for assessment with CT angiography for MLKI within a high-energy context and for certain injury patterns including bicruciate and PLC injuries (LoA 89.7%). The value of stress radiography or intraoperative fluoroscopy also reached consensus (LoA 89.7%). Within treatment, it was generally agreed that existing literature generally favours operative management of MLKI, particularly for young patients (LoA 100%), and that single-stage surgery should be performed whenever possible (LoA 92.3%). This consensus statement will facilitate clinical communication in MLKI, the care of these patients and future research within MLKI.

Predictors of Increased Fragility Index Scores in Surgical Randomized Controlled Trials: An Umbrella Review.

BACKGROUND: The fragility index (FI) is defined as the minimum number of patients or subjects needed to switch experimental groups for statistical significance to be lost in a randomized control trial (RCT). This index is used to determine the robustness of a study's findings and recently as a measure of evaluating RCT quality. The objective of this review was to identify and describe published systematic reviews utilizing FI to evaluate surgical RCTs and to determine if there were common factors associated with higher FI values. METHODS: Three databases (PubMed, MEDLINE [Ovid], Embase) were searched, followed by a subsequent abstract/title and full-text screening to yield 50 reviews of surgical RCTs. Authors, year of publication, name of journal, study design, number of RCTs, subspecialty, sample size, median FI, patients lost to follow-up, and associations between variables and FI scores were collected. RESULTS: Among 1007 of 2214 RCTs in 50 reviews reporting FI (median sample size 100), the pooled median FI was 3 (IQR: 1-7). Most reviews investigated orthopaedic surgery RCTs (n = 32). There was a moderate correlation between FI and p value (r = 0.-413), a mild correlation between FI and sample size (r = 0.188), and a mild correlation between FI and event number (r = 0.129). CONCLUSION: Based on a limited sample of systematic reviews, surgical RCT FI values are still low (2-5). Future RCTs in surgery require improvement to study design in order to increase the robustness of statistically significant findings.

The accuracy of routine knee MR imaging in detection of acute neurovascular injury following multiligamentous knee injury.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of routine knee MRI in detecting acute popliteal artery and/or common peroneal nerve (CPN) dysfunction following multiligamentous knee injury (MLKI), with correlation of MRI findings to clinical outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Routine MRI knee examinations in 115 MLKI patients (54/115 with acute neurovascular injury, 61/115 without neurovascular injury) were retrospectively reviewed. Cases were classified by injury mechanism and ligamentous injuries sustained. MRI examinations were reviewed by two readers for vascular (arterial flow void, arterial calibre, intimal flap, perivascular hematoma) and CPN (intraneural T2-hyperintensity, calibre, discontinuity, perineural hematoma) injuries. Accuracy of routine knee MRI in the diagnosis of acute neurovascular injury and correlation of MRI findings to clinical outcome were evaluated. RESULTS: Patients included 86/115 males, mean age 33 years. The accuracy of MRI in diagnosis of acute CPN injury was 80.6%, 83.6% (readers 1 and 2): sensitivity (78%, 79.7%), specificity (80%, 86.7%), PPV (78%, 82.5%), and NPV (82.7%, 84.4%). Increased intraneural T2 signal showed a significant correlation to acute CPN dysfunction (p < 0.05). MRI was 75%, 69.8% (readers 1 and 2) accurate in detecting acute vascular injury: sensitivity (73.3%, 86.7%), specificity (75.2%, 67.3%), PPV (30.5%, 36.1%), and NPV (95%, 97.1%). No MRI features of vascular injury showed a statistical correlation with clinical outcome. Neurovascular complications were more common in ultra-low-energy injuries and KD-V3L pattern of ligament disruption. CONCLUSION: Routine MRI is of limited accuracy in assessing vascular complication, but higher accuracy in assessing CPN injury following MLKI. Increased intraneural T2 signal on conventional knee MR imaging shows statistically significant association with clinically documented acute CPN dysfunction following MLKI.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Patellar Tendon Autograft Fixation at 0° Versus 30° Results in Improved Activity Scores and a Greater Proportion of Patients Achieving the Minimal Clinical Important Difference For Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: The aim of the current study was to determine the effect of the knee flexion angle (KFA) during tibial anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft fixation on patient-reported outcomes, graft stability, extension loss, and reoperation after anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction. METHODS: All 169 included patients (mean age 28.5 years, 65% male) were treated with anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction using patellar tendon autograft and were randomized to tibial fixation of the ACL graft at either 0° (n = 85) or 30° (n = 84). The primary outcome was the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) 2 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the Marx Activity Scale (MAS), the rate of reoperation, and physical examination findings at 1 year, including KT-1000 and side-to-side differences in knee extension. RESULTS: The follow-up rate was 82% (n = 139) for the primary outcome. Graft failure rate at 2 years was 1% (n = 2, 1 per group). ACL tibial graft fixation at 0° or 30° did not have a significant effect on KOOS scores at 2 years after ACLR. Patients whose graft was fixed at a knee flexion angle of 0° had greater scores on the MAS (mean 9.6 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.5 to 10.6, versus 8.0, 95% CI 6.9 to 9.1; P = .04), and a greater proportion achieved the minimal clinical important difference (MCID) for the KOOS pain subdomain (94% versus 81%; P = .04). There was no significant difference in knee extension loss, KT-1000 measurements, or reoperation between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: In the setting of anatomic single-bundle ACLR using patellar tendon autograft and anteromedial portal femoral drilling, there was no difference in KOOS scores between patients fixed at 0° and 30°. Patient fixed in full extension did demonstrate higher activity scores at 2 years after surgery and a greater likelihood of achieving the MCID for KOOS pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II, prospective randomized trial.

Single and double bundle posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction yield comparable clinical and functional outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review and compare the functional and objective outcomes after single-bundle (SB) vs. double-bundle (DB) posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (PCLR). Where possible to pool outcomes and arrive at summary estimates of treatment effect for DB PCLR vs. SB PCLR via an embedded meta-analysis. METHODS: A comprehensive PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) literature search identified 13 eligible studies evaluating clinical outcomes of both techniques for PCLR. Clinical outcome measures included in the meta-analysis were functional outcomes (Lysholm Score, Tegner Activity Scale) and objective measurements of posterior laxity of the operated knee (arthrometer and stress radiographs). RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 603 patients. Three hundred and fifteen patients were treated with SB and two hundred and eighty-eight patients with DB PCLR. There were no significant differences between SB and DB PCLR in postoperative functional Lysholm Scores (CI [- 0.18, 0.17]), Tegner Activity Scales (CI [- 0.32, 0.12]) and IKDC objective grades (CI [- 0.13, 1.17]). Regarding posterior stability using KT-1000 and Kneelax III arthrometer measurements, there were no differences between the SB and DB group. However, double-bundle reconstruction provided better objective outcome of measurement of posterior laxity (CI [0.02, 0.46]) when measured with Telos stress radiography. CONCLUSION: A systematic review was conducted to identify current best evidence pertaining to DB and SB PCLR. An embedded meta-analysis arrived at similar summary estimates of treatment effect for motion, stability and overall function for both techniques. There is no demonstrable clinically relevant difference between techniques based on the currently available evidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Is There a Disadvantage to Early Physical Therapy After Multiligament Surgery for Knee Dislocation? A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Multiligament knee injuries, though rare, can be profoundly disabling. Surgeons disagree about when to initiate rehabilitation after surgical reconstruction due to the conflicting priorities of postoperative stability and motion. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does early or late initiation of physical therapy after multiligament knee surgery result in fewer postoperative manipulations? (2) Does early versus late physical therapy compromise stability postoperatively? (3) Does early initiation of physical therapy result in improved patient-reported outcomes, as measured by the Multi-ligament Quality of Life (ML-QOL) score? METHODS: Between 2011 and 2016, 36 adults undergoing multiligament repair or reconstruction were prospectively enrolled in a randomized controlled trial and randomized 1:1 to either early rehabilitation or late rehabilitation after surgery. Eligibility included those with an injury to the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) and at least one other ligament, as well as the ability to participate in early rehabilitation. Patients who were obtunded or unable to adhere to the protocols for other reasons were excluded. Early rehabilitation consisted of initiating a standardized physical therapy protocol on postoperative day 1 involving removal of the extension splint for quadriceps activation and ROM exercises. Late rehabilitation consisted of full-time immobilization in an extension splint for 3 weeks. Following this 3-week period, both groups engaged in the same standardized physical therapy protocol. All surgical reconstructions were performed at a single center by one of two fellowship-trained sports orthopaedic surgeons, and all involved allograft Achilles tendon PCL reconstruction. When possible, hamstring autograft was used for ACL and medial collateral ligament reconstructions, whereas lateral collateral ligament and posterolateral reconstruction was performed primarily with allograft. The primary outcome was the number of patients undergoing manipulation during the first 6 months. Additional outcomes added after trial registration were patient-reported quality of life scores (ML-QOL) at 1 year and an objective assessment of laxity through a physical examination and stress radiographs at 1 year. One patient from each group was not assessed for laxity or ROM at 1 year, and one patient from each group did not complete the ML-QOL questionnaires. No patient crossover was observed. RESULTS: With the numbers available, there was no difference in the use of knee manipulation during the first 6 months between the rehabilitation groups: 1 of 18 patients in the early group and 4 of 18 patients in the late group (p = 0.34). Similarly, there were no differences in knee ROM, stability, or patient-reported quality of life (ML-QOL) between the groups at 1 year. CONCLUSION: With the numbers available in this study, we were unable to demonstrate a difference between early and late knee rehabilitation with regard to knee stiffness, laxity, or patient-reported quality of life outcomes. The results of this small, randomized pilot study suggest a potential role for early rehabilitation after multiligament reconstruction for knee dislocation, which should be further explored in larger multi-institutional studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.

A Comparison of Quadriceps Tendon Autograft With Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Autograft and Hamstring Tendon Autograft for Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: There is growing enthusiasm for the increased use of quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The purpose of this analysis was to synthesize and quantitatively assess the available evidence comparing QT autograft with hamstring tendon (HT) and bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autografts, regarding functional outcomes, knee stability, anterior knee pain, and revision rates. DATA SOURCES: A search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for eligible studies up to May 2018 was conducted. Two reviewers selected studies based on inclusion criteria and assessed methodological quality. Outcomes analyzed were anterior knee pain, graft failure rates, knee stability, functional outcomes, and adverse events. Pooled analyses were performed for continuous and dichotomous variables where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: Ten studies (1 randomized trial and 9 nonrandomized cohorts) met our inclusion criteria, which included 1398 patients. The analysis showed no statistical difference in anterior knee pain when comparing QT and HT autografts, but a significant difference between QT and BPTB autografts [odds ratio, 0.15 (95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.27); P < 0.001]. There were no differences between all 3 autografts in revision rates, knee stability, and patient-reported functional outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Quadriceps tendon autograft is a suitable graft alternative for primary ACLR, as it achieves good clinical outcomes with a low incidence of anterior knee pain. Given the limited quality of the included studies, there is a need for a well-designed multicenter randomized control trial comparing QT autograft with other primary ACL autografts to confirm our findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV systematic review.

Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Meta-analysis of Short-Term Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome treated with hip arthroscopy versus those treated with physical therapy alone. METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to February 15, 2019. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared operative versus nonoperative treatment in the management of FAI for a minimum 6-month follow-up period were included. The primary outcome was the International Hip Outcome Tool 33. The CLEAR NPT (Checklist to Evaluate a Report of a Nonpharmacological Trial) was used to evaluate the methodologic quality of included studies. RESULTS: Three RCTs (Level I) were included with a total of 650 patients (323 randomized to surgery and 327 randomized to physical therapy), follow-rate of 90% (583 patients, 295 operative and 288 nonoperative), and average of 11.5 months' follow-up. Regarding participation, 222 of 350 patients (63%) in the FAIT (Femoroacetabular Impingement Trial) study, 348 of 648 (54%) in the FASHIoN (Full UK RCT of Arthroscopic Surgery for Hip Impingement Versus Best Conservative Care) study, and 80 of 104 (77%) in the study by Mansell et al. agreed to participate. The mean age was 35 years, and 51.5% of patients were male patients. All 3 RCTs represented high methodologic quality and a low risk of bias. The frequency-weighted mean follow-up period was 10 months. A meta-analysis of the 3 randomized trials showed that patients treated with operative management had improved preoperative-to-postoperative change scores on the International Hip Outcome Tool 33 compared with the nonoperative group (standardized mean difference, 3.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-6.86; P < .05). One study reported on the achievement of clinically relevant outcomes at the individual level, with 51% of the operative group and 32% of the nonoperative group achieving the minimal clinically important difference and with 48% and 19%, respectively, achieving the patient acceptable symptomatic state for the Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this meta-analysis show that patients with FAI syndrome treated with hip arthroscopy have statistically superior hip-related outcomes in the short term compared with those treated with physical therapy alone. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, meta-analysis of Level I RCTs.

Comprehensive Case-Based Review of Knee Ligament Injuries.

The management of knee ligament injuries continues to evolve, and much debate persists over the timing of surgery, repair versus reconstruction, surgical technique, postoperative rehabilitation, graft selection, and fixation. Surgeons should be aware of updates on the best management strategies of knee ligament injuries in 2018 and understand the important history and physical examination findings of the knee with ligamentous injury; the anterior cruciate ligament; the role of the anterolateral ligament and lateral extra-articular tenodesis; combined anterior cruciate ligament and medial collateral ligament injuries; the posterior cruciate ligament; medial collateral ligament repair versus reconstruction; posterolateral corner repair versus reconstruction; the role of coronal plane osteotomies, including high tibial osteotomy and distal femoral osteotomy; the role of sagittal plane osteotomies, including anterior closing wedge osteotomy and anterior opening wedge osteotomy; the initial management of the multiligament-injured knee; and five keys to avoiding complications in the multiligament-injured knee. The best available evidence and sample case presentations help guide surgical decision making and improve patient outcomes.

Imaging of the Postoperative Condition of Posterolateral Corner Injuries.

Posterolateral corner (PLC) injuries of the knee are often sustained in combination with anterior or posterior cruciate ligament injuries. A variety of surgical techniques including acute repair, nonanatomical reconstructions, and anatomical reconstructions have been used to treat grade III PLC injuries. Scant literature is available on postoperative imaging of the PLC. This article reviews the more commonly used surgical techniques and the postoperative imaging assessment of the PLC of the knee.

No clinical differences between anteromedial portal and transtibial technique for femoral tunnel positioning in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a prospective randomized, controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The anteromedial (AMP) portal technique was introduced to position the femoral tunnel in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction to more closely replicate the original ACL footprint compared to the transtibial (TT) approach. Few randomized trials have evaluated differences in these techniques with respect to clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine if there are any differences in clinical outcome between the AMP and TT approaches. METHODS: This is a single-blinded, prospective, randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized to undergo ACL reconstruction using the AMP or TT approach. The primary outcome measure was the ACL quality of life (ACL-QOL), and secondary outcomes were the IKDC knee assessment, side-to-side difference in anterior-posterior knee laxity (KT-1000) and tunnel orientation (X-ray findings) at preoperative, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperative. Statistical comparisons were performed using a series of t tests for independent groups with equal variance. RESULTS: Ninety-six participants were consented and randomized between 2007 and 2011 with eight excluded postrandomization. Mean (SD) preoperative ACL-QOL was 33 (13) for TT and 36 (17) for AMP and improved significantly (p < 0.001) in both groups to 79 (18) and 78 (18) at 24 months postoperative, respectively. The preoperative median IKDC grade for both groups was C and improved similarly in both groups at 24 months (n.s.). There was no side-to-side difference in knee laxity based on KT-1000 measurements with a mean (SD) 1 (3) mm between affected and unaffected limbs in the TT group compared to 1 (3) mm for the AMP group. A significant difference was found in femoral tunnel orientation with the AMP group at 43° (7) and the TT group 58° (8) in the coronal plane (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: No differences in clinical outcome were found when comparing AMP to TT in primary ACL reconstruction using a STG graft. This prospective randomized controlled trial suggests surgeons can use either method without significantly compromising clinical outcome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Meniscal root tears occur frequently in multi-ligament knee injury and can be predicted by associated MRI injury patterns.

PURPOSE: The frequency of meniscal root tears in association with multi-ligament knee injury has not been established but adds to the complexity of surgical reconstruction and may have long-term consequences. Therefore, identifying root tears, on preoperative imaging, is important. The aim of this study was to identify the frequency of meniscal root tears, on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging, following multi-ligament injury and distinguish associated injury patterns that may aid detection. METHODS: Cases were identified from a prospectively collected institutional database. The magnetic resonance imaging of 188 multi-ligament injuries [median age 31 years (range 16-64)] was retrospectively reviewed by three musculoskeletal radiologists with the presence of meniscal injuries recorded alongside the ligament injury pattern and intra-articular fractures. Assessment of injury pattern was solely made on this imaging. RESULTS: 38 meniscal root injuries were identified in 37 knees (overall frequency = 20.2%; medial = 10.6%; lateral = 9.6%). The frequency of meniscal root tears was not increased in higher grade injuries (21.5% vs. 17.0%, n.s.). Valgus injury patterns were associated with lateral root tears (p < 0.05) and varus patterns were associated with medial root tears (p < 0.05). Further, fractures in the same compartment were associated with both medial and lateral root tears (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Meniscal root tears occur more frequently in multi-ligament knee injury than previously reported with isolated anterior cruciate rupture. Root tears can be predicted by ligament injury patterns and fractures sustained (suggestive of a compressive force). In multi-ligament cases, the preoperative magnetic resonance imaging can be used to detect these tears and associated patterns of injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Accuracy of non-arthrographic 3T MR imaging in evaluation of intra-articular pathology of the hip in femoroacetabular impingement.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the accuracy of non-arthrographic 3-T MRI compared to hip arthroscopy in the assessment of labral and cartilaginous pathology in patients with suspected FAI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Following IRB approval and waived consent, 42 consecutive cases of suspected FAI with non-arthrographic 3-T MRI and arthroscopy of the hip were reviewed. High-resolution TSE MR imaging was evaluated in consensus by two musculoskeletal radiologists, blinded to arthroscopic findings, for the presence of labral tears and articular cartilage lesions. Acetabular cartilage was categorized as normal, degeneration/fissuring, delamination, or denudation. MRI findings were compared to arthroscopy. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and predictive values for MRI were calculated using arthroscopy as the standard of reference. RESULTS: Forty-two hips in 38 patients with a mean age of 29 (range 13-45 years) were assessed. Mean interval between MRI and arthroscopy was 154 days (range 27-472 days). MRI depicted 41 cases with labral tears (sensitivity 100%, specificity 50%, accuracy 98%, PPV 98%, NPV 100%), 11 cases with femoral cartilage abnormalities (sensitivity 85%, specificity 100%, accuracy 95%, PPV 100%, NPV 94%), and 36 cases with acetabular cartilage lesions (sensitivity 94% specificity 67%, accuracy 90%, PPV 94%, NPV 67%). Of the 36 cases with acetabular cartilage lesions on MRI, 7 were characterized as degeneration/fissuring, 26 as delamination, and 3 as denudation, with discordant results between MRI and arthroscopy for grading of articular cartilage in ten cases. CONCLUSION: Non-arthrographic 3-T MR imaging is a highly accurate technique for evaluation of the labrum and cartilage in patients with clinically suspected FAI.

Does Study Design Affect Redislocation Rates After Primary Shoulder Dislocations? A Systematic Review Comparing Prospective and Retrospective Studies.

PURPOSE: To compare recurrence rates between prospectively collected and retrospectively collected data on primary anterior shoulder dislocations, as this could influence the timing of surgical decision making. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and hand searches was performed. Recurrence rates of anterior shoulder dislocations were collected from relevant articles, along with follow-up length, age, and gender. An independent sample t test was conducted to evaluate our hypothesis. A multiple linear regression model was used to examine the variance in recurrence rates while controlling for covariates. RESULTS: A total of 1,379 articles were identified, of which 25 were relevant to our study-16 prospective and 9 retrospective. The average rate of recurrence of anterior shoulder dislocations in retrospective studies (mean [M] = 45.2, standard deviation [SD] = 31.67) was not significantly different from that in prospective studies (M = 56.7, SD = 22.55). The 95% confidence interval for the difference of the means ranged from -34.05 to 10.91. After controlling for covariates with the multiple linear regression, only 1.9% of the variance in recurrence rates was due to study type and was not significant (P = .42). The t test performed to evaluate our hypothesis was also not significant t(23) = -1.07, P = .298. CONCLUSIONS: When comparing prospective and retrospective studies, there was no significant difference in recurrence rates of primary anterior shoulder dislocations treated nonoperatively. The average redislocation rate was 56.7% in prospective studies and 45.2% in retrospective studies. Furthermore, the majority of this difference was accounted for by varying rates between age groups. Further research is needed to determine the risk of redislocation in specific age groups, to guide treatment decisions based on varying risk. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review of Level II and III studies.

Reliability and Validity of the Arthroscopic International Cartilage Repair Society Classification System: Correlation With Histological Assessment of Depth.

PURPOSE: To determine the interobserver reliability of the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) grading system of chondral lesions in cadavers, to determine the intraobserver reliability of the ICRS grading system comparing arthroscopy and video assessment, and to compare the arthroscopic ICRS grading system with histological grading of lesion depth. METHODS: Eighteen lesions in 5 cadaveric knee specimens were arthroscopically graded by 7 fellowship-trained arthroscopic surgeons using the ICRS classification system. The arthroscopic video of each lesion was sent to the surgeons 6 weeks later for repeat grading and determination of intraobserver reliability. Lesions were biopsied, and the depth of the cartilage lesion was assessed. Reliability was calculated using intraclass correlations. RESULTS: The interobserver reliability was 0.67 (95% confidence interval, 0.5-0.89) for the arthroscopic grading, and the intraobserver reliability with the video grading was 0.8 (95% confidence interval, 0.67-0.9). A high correlation was seen between the arthroscopic grading of depth and the histological grading of depth (0.91); on average, surgeons graded lesions using arthroscopy a mean of 0.37 (range, 0-0.86) deeper than the histological grade. CONCLUSIONS: The arthroscopic ICRS classification system has good interobserver and intraobserver reliability. A high correlation with histological assessment of depth provides evidence of validity for this classification system. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As cartilage lesions are treated on the basis of the arthroscopic ICRS classification, it is important to ascertain the reliability and validity of this method.

Adductor Canal Block Provides Noninferior Analgesia and Superior Quadriceps Strength Compared with Femoral Nerve Block in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: By targeting the distal branches of the femoral nerve in the mid-thigh, the adductor canal block (ACB) can preserve quadriceps muscle strength while providing analgesia similar to a conventional femoral nerve block (FNB) for inpatients undergoing major knee surgery. In this randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial, the authors hypothesized that ACB provides postoperative analgesia that is at least as good as FNB while preserving quadriceps strength after outpatient anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. METHODS: A total of 100 patients were randomized to receive ACB or FNB with 20 ml ropivacaine 0.5% (with epinephrine). The authors sequentially tested the joint hypothesis that ACB is noninferior to FNB for cumulative oral morphine equivalent consumption and area under the curve for pain scores during the first 24 h postoperatively and also superior to FNB for postblock quadriceps maximal voluntary isometric contraction. RESULTS: The authors analyzed 52 and 48 patients who received ACB and FNB, respectively. Compared with preset noninferiority margins, the ACB-FNB difference (95% CI) in morphine consumption and area under the curve for pain scores were -4.8 mg (-12.3 to 2.7) (P = 0.03) and -71 mm h (-148 to 6) (P < 0.00001), respectively, indicating noninferiority of ACB for both outcomes. The maximal voluntary isometric contraction for ACB and FNB at 45 min were 26.6 pound-force (24.7-28.6) and 10.6 pound-force (8.3-13.0) (P < 0.00001), respectively, indicating superiority of ACB. CONCLUSION: Compared with FNB, the study findings suggest that ACB preserves quadriceps strength and provides noninferior postoperative analgesia for outpatients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Editorial Commentary: Book? Book Report? or Just a New Chapter in an Ongoing Story?: Knee Partial Meniscectomy Has Limited Benefit for "Nonobstructive" Meniscal Tears, but We Need to Know if Patients Have Osteoarthritis.

Knee partial meniscectomy has limited benefit for "nonobstructive" meniscal tears, but we need to know if included patients have osteoarthritis. Research on outcomes of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus nonsurgical treatment must consider not only signs and symptoms but also imaging findings, to determine the indications for surgical versus nonsurgical in a selected patient.

Microfracture for chondral defects: assessment of the variability of surgical technique in cadavers.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the variability of the microfracture technique when performed by experienced knee arthroscopy surgeons. METHOD: Four surgeons were each asked to perform microfracture on six preformed cartilage defects in fresh human cadaveric knees. Surgeons were instructed on penetration depth, inter-hole distance, and to place the holes perpendicular to the subchondral surface. Micro-computed tomography was used to calculate depth error, inter-hole distance error, and deviation of penetration angles from the perpendicular. RESULTS: All surgeons misjudged depth and inter-hole distance, tending to make microfracture holes too deep (depth error 1.1 mm ± 1.9) and too close together (inter-hole distance error: -0.8 mm ± 0.4). Fifty-one per cent of holes were angled more than 10° from the perpendicular (range 2.6°-19.8°). Both depth and distance errors were significantly lower in the trochlear groove than on the femoral condyle (p < 0.05). Surface shearing was associated with both penetration depth >4 mm and angles >20°. Inter-hole infraction occurred in holes closer than 2.5 mm to each other. CONCLUSION: Even experienced knee arthroscopy surgeons demonstrate inconsistency in surgical technique when performing microfracture. While further research will be required to demonstrate that these variations in surgical technique are associated with poorer clinical outcomes after microfracture, surgeons should attempt to minimizing such variations in order to prevent surface shearing and inter-hole infraction.