Meniscal Radial Tears Repaired With All-Inside and Inside-Out Techniques Result in Improved Clinical Outcome Scores, but Inside-Out Repairs May Be Associated With Higher Failure Rates Clinically and on Second-Look Arthroscopy: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs), failure, and healing rates after all-inside (AI) repair versus inside-out (IO) repair for the treatment of meniscal radial tears. METHODS: A literature search was performed according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using the Scopus, PubMed, and Embase computerized databases. Level of Evidence I through IV human clinical studies evaluating PROs and/or the incidence of failure and healing after AI versus IO repairs for meniscal radial tears were included. Clinical failure was defined by the presence of joint-line tenderness; a positive McMurray test; and mechanical symptoms, such as locking, catching, or giving way. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria and the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. RESULTS: Ten studies published from 2008 to 2023 comprising 205 patients were identified, including 142 patients who underwent AI repair and 63 patients who underwent IO repair for radial meniscus tears. Postoperative Lysholm and Tegner scores ranged from 90.8 to 95.6 and 5.7 to 8.2, respectively, in the AI repair group, compared with 86.9 to 94.2 and 6 to 7.5, respectively, in the IO repair group. All patients exceeded published values for minimal clinically important difference for the Lysholm score. Clinical failure ranged from 0% to 40% in the AI group and 0% to 62.5% in the IO group. Healing assessments on second-look arthroscopy revealed failure rates ranging from 0% to 13.3% in the AI group and 0% to 39% in the IO group. Complete and partial healing ranged from 28.6% to 92.3% in the AI group and from 25% to 70% in the IO group. Chondral damage on second-look arthroscopy ranged from 0% to 95% in the IO group and 0% to 57.7% in the AI group. Postoperative complications ranged from 0% to 2% within the AI group, whereas no complications were reported in the IO group. No implant-related complications were reported in any study group. CONCLUSIONS: Both all-inside and inside-out repairs for meniscal radial tears demonstrated improved PROs; however, current literature suggests that the IO technique may have higher failure rates both clinically and on second-look arthroscopy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Labral Augmentation With Either Iliotibial Band Allograft or Dermis Allograft Perform Similarly Regarding Peak Force, Displacement, and Work to Labral Repair in Suction Seal Restoration: A Biomechanical Study.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether allograft substitutes may be used to restore suctional seal properties with labral augmentation, the purpose of the current study was to evaluate the biomechanical properties of the labral suction seal under several scenarios, including: (1) intact labrum, (2) rim preparation, (3) labral repair, (4) labral augmentation with iliotibial band (ITB), and (5) labral augmentation with a dermis allograft. METHODS: Eleven hemi-pelvises were dissected to the level of the labrum and placed in a material testing system for biomechanical axial distraction. Each specimen was compressed to 250 newtons (N) and distracted at 10 mm/s while load, crosshead displacement, and time were continuously recorded. For each of the 5 labral states, 3 testing repetitions were performed. Peak force (N, newtons), displacement at peak force (mm, millimeter), and work (N-mm, newton, millimeter) were calculated and normalized to the intact state of each specimen. RESULTS: Eleven specimens were tested and 8 specimens (age: 58.6 ± 5.4 years, body mass index: 28.6 ± 6.8 kg/m2; 4 female patients; 5 right hips) were included in final analyses. Expressed as a percentage relative to the intact state, the average normalized peak force, displacement at peak force, and work for each labral state were as follows: intact (100.0% ± 0% for all), rim preparation (89.0% ± 9.2%, 93.3% ± 20.6%, 85.1% ± 9.0%), repair (61.3% ± 17.9%, 88.4% ± 36.9%, 58.1% ± 16.7%), ITB allograft (62.7% ± 24.9%, 83.9% ± 21.6%, 59.4% ± 22.4%), and dermis allograft (57.8% ± 27.2%, 88.2% ± 29.5%, 50.0% ± 20.1%). Regarding peak force, intact state was significantly greater compared with the labral repair, augmentation with ITB, and augmentation with the dermis allograft states (P < .001). No significant differences were demonstrated between displacement at peak force (P = .561). Regarding work, both intact state and rim preparation states were significantly greater than the repair, ITB augmentation, and dermis allograft augmentation states (P < .001). In all outcome measures, the dermis allograft augmentation performed with no statistical difference to the ITB augmentation state. CONCLUSIONS: Labral repair and labral augmentation with either ITB allograft or the dermis allograft resulted in significantly lower peak force and work to equilibrium compared with the intact and rim prep states. There was no statistical difference between repair and augmentation states as well as no statistical difference between ITB allograft and dermal allograft at time zero. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study compares biomechanical properties of the suction seal of the hip comparing labral states including intact, rim preparation, repair, and augmentation, which can be used for surgical decision-making.

Isolated Primary Latarjet Procedures for Anterior Shoulder Instability Results in High Rates of Graft Resorption and Glenohumeral Degenerative Changes With Low Rates of Failure at a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the incidence of postoperative complications after an isolated primary Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability at a minimum 2-year follow-up. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in accordance with 2020 PRISMA guidelines. EMBASE, Scopus, and PubMed databases were queried from database inception through September 2022. The literature search was limited to human clinical studies reporting on postoperative complications and adverse events after a primary Latarjet procedure with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Risk of bias was measured using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies, consisting of 1,797 patients (n = 1,816 shoulders), with a mean age of 24 years were identified. The overall postoperative complication rate ranged from 0% to 25.7%, with the most common complication being persistent shoulder pain (range: 0%-25.7%). Radiological changes included graft resorption (range: 7.5%-100%) and glenohumeral degenerative changes (range: 0%-52.5%). Recurrent instability following surgery was documented in 0% to 35% of shoulders, while the incidence of bone block fractures ranged from 0% to 6% of cases. Postoperative nonunion, infection, and hematomas had a reported incidence rate ranging from 0% to 16.7%, 0% to 2.6%, and 0% to 4.4%, respectively. Overall, 0% to 7.5% of surgeries were reported failures, and 0% to 11.1% of shoulders required reoperation, with a revision rate ranging from 0% to 7.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of complications following the primary Latarjet procedure for shoulder instability was variable, ranging from 0% to 25.7%. High rates of graft resorption, degenerative changes, and nonunion were present while failure and revision rates remained low at a minimum 2-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of Level I-III studies.

Platelet-Rich Plasma, Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate, and Hyaluronic Acid Injections Outperform Corticosteroids in Pain and Function Scores at a Minimum of 6 Months as Intra-Articular Injections for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of common intra-articular injections used in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, including corticosteroid (CS), hyaluronic acid (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), with a minimum follow-up of 6-months. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines in August 2022 in the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Level I to II randomized clinical trials with a minimum follow-up of 6 months that investigated the treatments of interest were included. Patient-reported outcome scores for pain and function at baseline and at latest follow-up were extracted, and the change in scores was converted to uniform 0 to 100 scales. Arm-based Bayesian network meta-analysis using a random-effects model was created to compare the treatment arms in pain and function. RESULTS: Forty-eight studies comprising a total of 9,338 knees were included. The most studied intra-articular injection was HA (40.9%), followed by placebo (26.2%), PRP (21.5%), CS (8.8%), and then BMAC (2.5%). HA and PRP both led to a significant improvement in pain compared with placebo. HA, PRP, and BMAC all led to a significant improvement in function scores when compared with placebo. Surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRAs) of the interventions revealed that PRP, BMAC, and HA were the treatments with the highest likelihood of improvement in both pain and function, with overall SUCRA scores of 91.54, 76.46, and 53.12, respectively. The overall SUCRA scores for CS and placebo were 15.18 and 13.70, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: At a minimum 6-month follow-up, PRP demonstrated significantly improved pain and function for patients with knee osteoarthritis compared with placebo. Additionally, PRP exhibited the highest SUCRA values for these outcomes when compared with BMAC, HA, and CS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, meta-analysis of Level I to II studies.

Meniscus Extrusion, Radial Tears, and Root Tears.

Management of meniscal radial and root tears and extrusion is complex and has changed significantly over recent years. It is important to provide a comprehensive overview of the management of radial and root tears and meniscal extrusion and be aware of the currently available evidence on repair techniques, rehabilitation, and outcomes following radial and root repairs.

Correlation between articular cartilage status on outcomes and survivorship following meniscal allograft transplantation: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review evaluating potential correlations between preoperative articular cartilage integrity on outcomes and survivorship in patients undergoing meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT). METHODS: A literature search was performed by querying SCOPUS, PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials from database inception through May 2023 according to the 2020 PRISMA statement. Inclusion criteria were limited to studies reporting on outcomes and survivorship following MAT based on preoperative cartilage status. RESULTS: Sixteen studies, consisting of 1723 patients (n = 1758 total menisci), were identified in six level III and 10 level IV evidence studies. There was high heterogeneity in cartilage grading scales, reporting of concomitant cartilage procedures, and indications for MAT based on osteoarthritis. Patients with lower limb malalignment were either excluded or corrected with an osteotomy. MAT failure rate was reported in nine studies, with four studies reporting a greater rate of failure in knees with higher degrees of cartilage damage. Eight studies reported on clinical outcomes based on cartilage grade, with two studies reporting significant differences in clinical outcomes based on cartilage grade. Of the five studies reporting management of full-thickness chondral defects with cartilage surgery, three studies reported no significant difference in survivorship based on preoperative cartilage grade, while one study reported lower survivorship and one study reported unclear results. No studies found significant differences in survivorship and outcomes between medial and lateral MAT. CONCLUSIONS: Conflicting results and high variability in reporting of concomitant cartilage repair and indications for MAT exist in studies evaluating the efficacy of MAT based on articular cartilage status. The degree of preoperative chondral damage did not have a strong relationship with clinical outcomes following MAT. Higher degrees of cartilage damage were associated with higher MAT failure rates, with possible improvement in survivorship when treated with an appropriate cartilage procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Medial Collateral Ligament Reconstruction and Repair Show Similar Improvement in Outcome Scores, But Repair Shows Higher Rates of Knee Stiffness and Failure: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To compare patient-reported outcomes and complications in patients with medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries undergoing repair versus reconstruction with a minimum 2-year follow-up. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Scopus, and Embase-computerized databases from database inception to November 2022, according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies evaluating clinical outcomes and complications at a minimum of 2 years following MCL repair versus reconstruction were included. Study quality was assessed using the MINORS criteria. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies published from 1997 to 2022, consisting of 503 patients were identified. Twelve studies (n = 308 patients; mean age: 32.6 years) reported outcomes following MCL reconstruction, and 8 studies (n = 195 patients; mean age: 28.5 years) reported results following MCL repair. Postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm, and Tegner scores ranged from 67.6 to 91, 75.8 to 94.8, and 4.4 to 8, respectively, in the MCL reconstruction group, compared to 73 to 91, 75.1 to 98.5, and 5.2 to 10, respectively, in the MCL repair group. Knee stiffness was the most commonly reported complication following MCL repair (range: 0% - 50%) and reconstruction (range: 0% - 26.7%). Failures occurred in 0% to 14.6% of patients following reconstruction versus 0% to 35.1% of patients undergoing MCL repair. Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) for postoperative arthrofibrosis (range: 0% - 12.2%) and surgical debridement for arthrofibrosis (range: 0% - 20%) were the most commonly reported reoperations in the MCL reconstruction and repair groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MCL reconstruction versus repair both demonstrate improved International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm, and Tegner scores. MCL repair demonstrates higher rates of postoperative knee stiffness and failure at a minimum 2-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Consistent Indications and Good Outcomes Despite High Variability in Techniques for Two-Stage Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the current literature regarding the indications, techniques, and outcomes after 2-stage revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). METHODS: A literature search was performed using SCOPUS, PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses statement. Inclusion criteria was limited to Level I-IV human studies reporting on indications, surgical techniques, imaging, and/or clinical outcomes of 2-stage revision ACLR. RESULTS: Thirteen studies with 355 patients treated with 2-stage revision ACLR were identified. The most commonly reported indications were tunnel malposition and tunnel widening, with knee instability being the most common symptomatic indication. Tunnel diameter threshold for 2-stage reconstruction ranged from 10 to 14 mm. The most common grafts used for primary ACLR were bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft, hamstring graft, and LARS (polyethylene terephthalate) synthetic graft. The time elapsed from primary ACLR to the first stage surgery ranged from 1.7 years to 9.7 years, whereas the time elapsed between the first and second stage ranged from 21 weeks to 13.6 months. Six different bone grafting options were reported, with the most common being iliac crest autograft, allograft bone dowels, and allograft bone chips. During definitive reconstruction, hamstring autograft and BPTB autograft were the most commonly used grafts. Studies reporting patient-reported outcome measures showed improvement from preoperative to postoperative levels in Lysholm, Tegner, and objective International Knee and Documentation Committee scores. CONCLUSIONS: Tunnel malpositioning and widening remain the most common indications for 2-stage revision ACLR. Bone grafting is commonly reported using iliac crest autograft and allograft bone chips and dowels, whereas hamstring autograft and BPTB autograft were the most used grafts during the second-stage definitive reconstruction. Studies showed improvements from preoperative to postoperative levels in commonly used patient reported outcomes measures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I, III, and IV studies.

Complication Rates After Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction Range From 0% to 32% With 0% to 11% Recurrent Instability: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To review the incidence of complications following primary medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction for recurrent patellar instability. METHODS: A literature search was conducted by querying PubMed and Scopus databases from database inception through August 2022 according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines using the terms "Medial Patellofemoral Ligament," "MPFL," "reconstruction," "patellar," and "instability." Inclusion criteria included studies reporting complications following primary MPFL reconstruction for recurrent patellar instability. Exclusion criteria consisted of studies reporting on patients undergoing concurrent osteotomy procedures, revision reconstruction, and biomechanical or anatomic studies. The incidence of specific complications was aggregated from the included studies. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies, consisting of 1,478 patients (n = 1521 knees), with a mean age of 23.3 years (mean range, 19-34.3 years) were identified. The overall incidence of complications ranged from 0% to 32.3% of knees. Failure ranged from 0% to 10.7% of knees, whereas patellar fractures occurred in 0% to 8.3% of knees, primarily in patients treated with full-length transverse tunnel or 2-tunnel techniques. All patellar fractures occurred in patients with patellar tunnels ranging from 4.5 to 6.0 mm in diameter. The incidence of postoperative knee stiffness/range of motion deficit ranged from 0% to 20%. Persistent anterior knee pain, ranged from 0% to 32.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Complications following primary MPFL reconstruction ranged from 0% to 32.3% of knees, primarily consisting of residual anterior knee pain. Failure ranged from 0% to 10.7% of knees, whereas patellar fractures were reported in 0% to 8.3% of knees. Fractures primarily occurred with a full-length transverse tunnel or 2-tunnel techniques, whereas all fractures occurred with patellar tunnels ranging from 4.5 mm to 6.0 mm in diameter. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; Systematic Review of Level I-IV studies.

Load Distribution After Serial Resection of the Posterior Horn of the Lateral Meniscus and Subsequent Meniscal Allograft Transplant: A Biomechanical Study.

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking as to when a meniscal allograft transplant (MAT) may be biomechanically superior to a partially resected lateral meniscus. HYPOTHESIS: Lateral MAT using a bone bridge technique would restore load distribution and contact pressures in the tibiofemoral joint to levels superior to those of a partial lateral meniscectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Eleven fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees were evaluated in 5 lateral meniscal testing conditions (native, one-third posterior horn meniscectomy, two-thirds posterior horn meniscectomy, total meniscectomy, MAT) at 3 flexion angles (0°, 30°, and 60°) under a 1600-N axial load. Pressure sensors were used to acquire contact pressure, contact area, and peak contact pressure within the tibiofemoral joint. RESULTS: Limited (one-third and two-thirds) partial lateral posterior horn meniscectomy showed no significant increase in mean and peak contact pressures as well as no significant decrease in contact area compared with the intact state. Total meniscectomy significantly increased mean contact pressure at 0° and 30° (P = .008 and P < .001, respectively), increased peak contact pressure at 30° (P = .04), and decreased mean contact area in all flexion angles compared with the native condition (P < .01). Lateral MAT significantly improved mean contact pressure compared with total meniscectomy at 0° and 30° (P = .002 and P = .003, respectively) and increased contact area at 30° and 60° (P = .003 and P = .009, respectively), although contact area was still significantly smaller (24.1%) after MAT relative to the native meniscus (P = 0.015). However, allograft transplant did not result in better tibiofemoral contact biomechanics compared with limited partial meniscectomy (P > .05). CONCLUSION: The peripheral portion of the lateral meniscus provided the most important contribution to the distribution of contact pressure across the tibiofemoral joint in the cadaveric model. Total meniscectomy significantly increased mean and peak contact pressure in the cadaveric model and decreased contact area. Lateral MAT restored contact biomechanics close to normal but was not superior to the partially meniscectomized status. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Surgeons should attempt to preserve a peripheral rim of the posterior lateral meniscus. Meniscal allograft transplant appears to improve but not normalize mean contact pressure and contact area relative to total lateral meniscectomy.

A Systematic Review of Adverse Events and Complications After Isolated Posterior Medial Meniscus Root Repairs.

BACKGROUND: Medial meniscus posterior root (MMPR) tears are recognized as a substantial cause of disability and morbidity. However, meniscus root repair, regardless of technique, is not without potential complications. PURPOSE: To evaluate the reported incidence of complications and adverse events after isolated MMPR repair. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines using Embase, PubMed, and Scopus databases with the following search terms combined with Boolean operators: "meniscus,""root," and "repair." Inclusion criteria consisted of level 1 to 4 human clinical studies in English or English-language translation reporting complications and adverse events after isolated posterior medial meniscus root repairs. The overall incidence of specific complications was estimated from the pooled sample of the included studies. RESULTS: Eleven studies with a total pooled sample of 442 patients were identified. The mean patient age was 58.1 years, while the mean final follow-up time was 37.2 months (range, 12-84.8 months). The overall incidence of complications was 9.7% (n = 43/442), with the most commonly reported complication being progressive degenerative changes within the knee (10.4%; n = 25/240; n = 5 studies). A total of 1.25% (n = 3/240) of patients who experienced degenerative changes required conversion to total knee arthroplasty. Repair failures were reported in 3.1% (n = 10/327; n = 8 studies) of patients. CONCLUSION: Repairing MMPR tears is critical in preventing accelerated progression of knee osteoarthritis in patients without significant knee osteoarthritis preoperatively. While this repair is still recommended and necessary in appropriate patients, this review found that the incidence of complications after isolated posterior medial meniscus root repair was 9.7%, primarily involving the presence of progressive degeneration, while repair failure was reported in 3% of patients.

Clinical outcomes, return to sport, and complications after isolated primary Latarjet versus Latarjet as a revision procedure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this review was to compare clinical outcomes, return to sport (RTS), and complications in comparative studies examining patients undergoing primary Latarjet procedure versus Latarjet in the revision setting following soft tissue stabilization. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria consisted of level I to III human clinical studies reporting clinical outcomes (Visual Analogue Pain Scale [VAS]), RTS metrics, and complications in patients following primary versus revision Latarjet procedures. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. RESULTS: A total of seven studies, consisting of 1170 patients (n=1179 shoulders) with a mean age of 26.4 years, consisting of 91.9% males (n=1083/1179 shoulders), were identified. Mean final follow-up was 46.4 (mean range, 7.3-72.2) months. A total of 748 primary and 431 revision Latarjet procedures were analyzed. Complications were reported in 9.6% (range, 0%-24.2%) of patients undergoing primary and 20.2% (range, 0%-40.7%) in patients undergoing revision procedures (p=0.22). There was no significant difference in the RTS rate between patients undergoing primary (87.3%; range, 83.8%-92.1%) versus Latarjet as a revision procedure (78.9%; range, 60%-100%) (p=0.08). Moreover, no significant difference in postoperative VAS was observed in patients undergoing primary versus Latarjet as a revision procedure (p=0.21). Recurrent shoulder subluxation was significantly greater in patients undergoing revision (12.0%; n=31/259 shoulders; range, 0%-20.7%) compared to primary procedures (3.3%; n=27/511 shoulders; range, 0%-9%) (p<0.001). DISCUSSION: Patients undergoing primary and revision Latarjet demonstrated overall similar rates of complications and return to sport. Of clinical importance, Latarjet as a revision procedure possessed a risk of recurrent subluxation 3.6 times higher than primary Latarjet. While effective, patients should be counseled regarding the differing prognosis between Latarjet as a primary or revision procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III; Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Current Concepts in Patellar Tendinopathy: An Overview of Imaging, Pathogenesis, and Nonoperative and Operative Management.

¼ Approximately 1 in 3 high-impact athletes develops patellar tendinopathy (PT), with the proximal insertion of the patellar tendon being the most commonly affected anatomical site.¼ Nonoperative treatment options are effective in reducing pain and restoring functionality in most patients with PT. However, operative intervention should be considered when conservative management fails.¼ A comprehensive review of the literature on surgical procedures, including both open and arthroscopic approaches, was conducted with a specific focus on clinical outcomes and return to sports.¼ Both open surgery and arthroscopic surgery for PT have demonstrated favorable success rates and return-to-sport outcomes, with arthroscopic treatment potentially expediting the recovery process.

Hip Capsular Reconstruction With Indirect Head of the Rectus Femoris Tendon.

Hip capsulotomy is performed during arthroscopic hip procedures to achieve adequate visualization of the joint and instrument access. The hip capsule, and in particular the iliofemoral ligament, is an important stabilizer of the hip joint, and patients who undergo capsulotomy without subsequent repair may experience hip pain and instability, with increased risk of requiring revision hip arthroscopy. Therefore, restoring watertight closure of the capsule is necessary to restore native biomechanics and achieve desired postoperative outcomes. Although primary repair or plication suffice in most cases, capsule reconstruction may instead be necessary when there is insufficient tissue, often due to capsular insufficiency following index surgery. The purpose of this Technical Note is to describe the authors' current technique for arthroscopic hip capsular reconstruction using the indirect head of the rectus femoris tendon in the setting of capsular iatrogenic hip instability, as well as its advantages and disadvantages and technical pearls and pitfalls.

Meniscus Radial Tears: Current Concepts on Management and Repair Techniques.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review provides a historical perspective on the approach to radial tears and collates the currently available evidence on repair techniques, rehabilitation, and outcomes following the treatment of meniscus radial tears. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent literature shows that the repair of meniscus radial tears reports improved patient-reported outcome scores with high return to function and activity. However, no single technique nor construct was proven better than the other. Various methods of repairing radial tears can be employed, with biomechanical research supporting all-inside double vertical sutures, the addition of vertical "rip-stop" mattress sutures, and transtibial pullout augmentation. To ensure proper healing before undergoing physical therapy, it is crucial to abstain from weight-bearing and deep knee flexion for the first 6 weeks after surgery. Despite considerable heterogeneity in surgical techniques and rehabilitation protocols found in the current literature, studies reporting on radial repairs report positive results, with high healing rates and improved patient-reported outcomes.

Top Ten Pearls for a Successful Transtibial Pull-Out Repair of Medial Meniscal Posterior Root Tears With a Concomitant Centralization Stitch.

Although historically overlooked, medial meniscus posterior root (MMPR) tears are now increasingly recognized as a substantial cause of biomechanical impairment and morbidity. MMPR tears, when left untreated, are strongly correlated to meniscal extrusion and ultimately lead to altered kinematics and loading functionally equivalent to a total meniscectomy. To prevent progressive joint degeneration and alleviate pain while re-establishing native joint kinematics, MMPR repair is generally recommended in appropriately selected patients. In this Technical Note, the authors describe a detailed checklist with 10 crucial points of emphasis when performing the gold-standard transtibial pull-out repair of the MMPR, with an additional centralization stitch, providing technical pearls backed up by previous literature and ample experience treating this condition.

Performance-Enhancing Drugs in Healthy Athletes: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.

CONTEXT: Many clinicians, trainers, and athletes do not have a true understanding of the effects of commonly used performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) on performance and health. OBJECTIVE: To provide an evidence-based review of 7 commonly used pharmacological interventions for performance enhancement in athletes. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Scopus databases were searched on April 8, 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) assessing the performance-enhancing effects of the following interventions were included: androgenic anabolic steroids (AAS), growth hormone (GH), selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs), creatine, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitors, recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO), and cannabis. STUDY DESIGN: Umbrella review of SRs and MAs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4. DATA EXTRACTION: Primary outcomes collected were (1) body mass, (2) muscle strength, (3) performance, and (4) recovery. Adverse effects were also noted. RESULTS: A total of 27 papers evaluating 5 pharmacological interventions met inclusion criteria. No studies evaluating SARMs or ACE-inhibitors were included. AAS lead to a 5% to 52% increase in strength and a 0.62 standard mean difference in lean body mass with subsequent lipid derangements. GH alters body composition, without providing a strength or performance benefit, but potential risks include soft tissue edema, fatigue, arthralgias, and carpel tunnel syndrome. Creatine use during resistance training can safely increase total and lean body mass, strength, and performance in high-intensity, short-duration, repetitive tasks. Limited evidence supports rHuEPO benefit on performance despite increases in both VO2max and maximal power output, and severe cardiovascular risks are documented. Cannabis provides no performance benefit and may even impair athletic performance. CONCLUSION: In young healthy persons and athletes, creatine can safely provide a performance-enhancing benefit when taken in controlled doses. AAS, GH, and rHuEPO are associated with severe adverse events and do not support a performance benefit, despite showing the ability to change bodily composition, strength, and/or physiologic measures. Cannabis may have an ergolytic, instead of ergogenic, effect.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Clinical Outcomes After Management of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Tibial Avulsion Fractures.

Background: There is no consensus regarding the management of posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) avulsion fractures and the expected outcomes after treatment. Purpose: To systematically review clinical outcomes and complications after management of tibial-sided avulsion fractures of the PCL. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A literature search of Scopus, PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials was performed in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Included were studies with evidence levels 1 to 4 that reported clinical outcomes after treatment of PCL tibial-sided avulsion fractures in humans. The quality of the included studies was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. A meta-analysis was performed for patient-reported outcome measures using random-effects modeling with 95% CIs. Results: A total of 58 studies published between 1999 and 2022 were identified. The mean MINORS score was 9.90 ± 4.12, indicating overall low-quality evidence with high risk of bias. The studies comprised 1440 patients (mean age, 32.59 ± 5.69 years; 75.2% males) with a mean follow-up of 26.9 ± 19.6 months (range, 5.3-126 months). Most patients were treated with open surgery (63.6%), followed by arthroscopic surgery (29.7%) and nonoperative treatment (6.7%). All patients reported significant posttreatment improvement in both subjective and objective outcomes (P < .05 for all). Arthroscopic surgery was associated with lower postoperative posterior tibial translation compared with open surgery (range, 0.6-3.2 vs 1.7-3.1 mm), greater preoperative to postoperative improvement in Lysholm score (54.6 vs 48.8; P < .0001), higher postoperative Tegner score (6.64 ± 1.03 vs 6.14 ± 2.29; P = .0448), and a higher rate of return to sport (100% vs 89.5%; P = .009). Nonoperative management was associated with a significantly lower fracture union rate (87% vs 99.1%; P < .0001) and greater postoperative side-to-side posterior translation (4.9 ± 4.3 mm) when compared with operative management. Conclusion: Although nonoperative and surgical management of PCL tibial avulsion fractures resulted in high rates of fracture union and improvement in functional outcome scores and a low incidence of complications, nonoperative treatment yielded a high side-to-side posterior displacement (>4 mm) with a lower rate of fracture union compared to surgical treatment.

Higher Rates of Residual Postoperative Instability after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Female Patients: A Systematic Review of Level II Studies.

Purpose: To compare revision rates and residual postoperative instability after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction based on biological sex. Methods: A systematic review was conducted according to the 2020 PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane library databases were queried from database inception through October 2022. Level I and II prospectively-enrolling human clinical studies that compared revision rates and physical examination of postoperative stability after ACL reconstruction between male and female patients were included. Outcomes were stratified by patient sex and quantitatively compared using a χ2 test. Study quality was assessed using the MINORS criteria. Results: Four studies consisting of 406 patients (50% males) with a mean age of 25 years (range, 13.9-62 years) were identified. Mean follow-up time was 34.4 months (range, 22-60 months). Hamstring tendon autografts were used in 62% of ACL reconstructions in males and in 65% of ACL reconstructions in females, whereas bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts were used in 38% and 35% of procedures in males and females, respectively. A residual positive Lachman test result was more frequently reported among females compared to males (5.8% vs 0.6%; P = 0.03). No significant difference in revision rates or residual pivot-shift on examination was observed between males and females (P = 0.38 and P = 0.08, respectively). Conclusion: Female patients undergoing ACL reconstruction have higher reported rates of residual anterior instability with Lachman than male patients. However, no sex-based differences were identified with residual pivot-shift on examination or rate of revision ACL surgery. Level of Evidence: II; Systematic Review of level II studies.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Comparing Complete Capsular Closure Against Unrepaired Hip Capsules During Hip Arthroscopy.

Background: While the biomechanical importance of the hip capsule is well described, there remains controversy over the necessity of routine capsular closure after hip arthroscopy. Purpose: To perform a meta-analysis of clinical studies to compare pooled outcomes of complete hip capsular closure cohorts against unrepaired hip capsule cohorts. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL/EBSCO, and Scopus were queried in February 2022 for studies that directly compared clinical outcomes for hip arthroscopy patients treated with either complete capsular closure or an unrepaired capsule. Outcomes assessed were incidence of revision hip arthroscopy, incidence of subsequent conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA), and improvement from baseline in modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score (HOS) activities of daily living (ADL), HOS sports specific (SS) subscale, Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) ADL, and HAGOS SS subscale. A pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) was used to compare changes in mHHS. A pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to compare changes in the ADL and SS outcomes. A pooled risk ratio (RR) was used to compare the probability of revision hip arthroscopy and conversion to THA based on capsular management. For pooled outcomes where heterogeneity was regarded as potentially unimportant, a fixed-effects model was implemented. For pooled outcomes with considerable heterogeneity, a random-effects model was implemented. Results: Of the 1896 records identified in our search, 11 studies (1897 patients) were included. A significantly higher improvement in mHHS (WMD, -3.72; 95% CI, -4.95 to -2.50; P < .00001) and ADL outcomes (SMD, -0.30; 95% CI, -0.54 to -0.07; P = .01) were seen after complete capsular closure. There was a significantly lower probability of subsequent revision hip arthroscopy (RR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.14 to 2.45; P = .008) and conversion to THA (RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.06 to 3.79; P = .03) after complete capsular repair. There was no difference in SS outcomes (SMD, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.16 to 0.13; P = .81) between the 2 groups. Conclusion: This meta-analysis demonstrated that routine complete capsular closure after hip arthroscopy led to superior clinical outcomes relative to unrepaired hip capsules.