High degree of consensus amongst an expert panel regarding focal resurfacing of chondral and osteochondral lesions of the femur with mini-implants.

INTRODUCTION: The rationale for the use of mini-implants for partial resurfacing in the treatment of femoral chondral and osteochondral lesions is still under debate. The evidence supporting best practise guidelines is based on studies with low-level evidence. A consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance towards consensus opinions regarding the best available evidence. The purpose of this article is to report the resulting consensus statements. METHODS: Twenty-five experts participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Questions and statements were drafted via an online survey of two rounds, for initial agreement and comments on the proposed statements. An in-person meeting between the panellists was organised during the 2022 ESSKA congress to further discuss and debate each of the statements. A final agreement was made via a final online survey a few days later. The strength of consensus was characterised as: consensus, 51-74% agreement; strong consensus, 75-99% agreement; unanimous, 100% agreement. RESULTS: Statements were developed in the fields of patient assessment and indications, surgical considerations and postoperative care. Between the 25 statements that were discussed by this working group, 18 achieved unanimous, whilst 7 strong consensus. CONCLUSION: The consensus statements, derived from experts in the field, represent guidelines to assist clinicians in decision-making for the appropriate use of mini-implants for partial resurfacing in the treatment of femoral chondral and osteochondral lesions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

A Randomized Trial of Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation Versus Alternative Forms of Surgical Cartilage Management in Patients With a Failed Primary Treatment for Chondral or Osteochondral Defects in the Knee.

BACKGROUND: There are limited randomized controlled trials with long-term outcomes comparing autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) versus alternative forms of surgical cartilage management within the knee. PURPOSE: To determine at 5 years after surgery whether ACI was superior to alternative forms of cartilage management in patients after a failed previous treatment for chondral or osteochondral defects in the knee. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: In total, 390 participants were randomly assigned to receive either ACI or alternative management. Patients aged 18 to 55 years with one or two symptomatic cartilage defects who had failed 1 previous therapeutic surgical procedure in excess of 6 months prior were included. Dual primary outcome measures were used: (1) patient-completed Lysholm knee score and (2) time from surgery to cessation of treatment benefit. Secondary outcome measures included International Knee Documentation Committee and Cincinnati Knee Rating System scores, as well as number of serious adverse events. Analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: Lysholm scores were improved by 1 year in both groups (15.4 points [95% CI, 11.9 to 18.8] and 15.2 points [95% CI, 11.6 to 18.9]) for ACI and alternative, with this improvement sustained over the duration of the trial. However, no evidence of a difference was found between the groups at 5 years (2.9 points; 95% CI, -1.8 to 7.5; P = .46). Approximately half of the participants (55%; 95% CI, 47% to 64% with ACI) were still experiencing benefit at 5 years, with time to cessation of treatment benefit similar in both groups (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.32; P > .99). There was a differential effect on Lysholm scores in patients without previous marrow stimulation compared with those with marrow stimulation (P = .03; 6.4 points in favor of ACI; 95% CI, -0.4 to 13.1). More participants experienced a serious adverse event with ACI (P = .02). CONCLUSION: Over 5 years, there was no evidence of a difference in Lysholm scores between ACI and alternative management in patients who had previously failed treatment. Previous marrow stimulation had a detrimental effect on the outcome of ACI. REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number: 48911177.

A 2021 consensus statement on osteotomies around the knee by the UK Knee Osteotomy consensus Group (KOG).

BACKGROUND: There are significant deficiencies in the evidence base of modern-day osteotomy which result in significant variation in practice between surgeons. The purpose of this statement was to develop a consensus statement on the practice of osteotomy so that a more standardized approach to the indications, surgical technique, and postoperative care could be outlined. The article is also intended to educate and inform the practice of individuals who are early in their experience and/or clinical practice. METHOD: A group of 29 specialist knee surgeons who regularly perform osteotomy was convened to form the Knee Osteotomy consensus Group (KOG). Consensus was determined utilizing the consensus group technique described by List. A total of 37 questions were asked covering all aspects of clinical practice. RESULTS: 20 statements were generated and debated until a criterion level of 70% was met. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus was achieved regarding 20 statements concerning Indications for surgery, decision making, surgical planning, technique, post-operative assessment and recovery.

Improved data illustration in complex multi-ligament knee reconstruction surgery: using the historical principles of Florence Nightingale and John Venn.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The collection of multi-ligament knee reconstruction procedure data generates long tabulated lists of featureless abbreviations, which are often difficult to interpret and present. As demonstrated with the launch of the Scandinavian anterior cruciate ligament registries, such data are under increasing scrutiny. When developing a visual tool to improve the interpretation, presentation, and ongoing collection of data within this field, much can be learnt from the historical teachings of Florence Nightingale and John Venn. METHODS: Unknown to many, Florence Nightingale was a pioneer of graphic data illustration, becoming a Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society in 1858. Further advances in the visualization of complex data relations were made by John Venn, who introduced the Venn diagram in 1880. With this background in mind, the present work has been based upon the senior author's case series of 70 patients undergoing complex knee-ligament reconstruction at Warrington Hospital, from 2001 to the present time. RESULTS AND INTERPRETATION: Although obviously not negating the need for tabulated data, the graphic representation put forward here successfully supplements featureless tabulated lists of abbreviations and can be updated easily and regularly. Providing a clear, bright illustration that is free from patient identifiers, it can be used in presentations and publications, and freely accessed by a multidisciplinary team. It assists in the identification of injury patterns, can accommodate illustration of associated factors such as meniscal injury, and clearly demonstrates each hospital's multi-ligament knee reconstruction experience. This facilitates comparison and collaboration between hospitals and promotes research.

An investigation to examine the inter-tester and intra-tester reliability of the Rolimeter knee tester, and its sensitivity in identifying knee joint laxity.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the Rolimeter knee tester (Aircast, Europe) as reliable and clinically sensitive tool for identifying and quantifying knee joint laxity utilising a sample of both known ACLD and normal knees. METHODS: Thirty matched subjects (15 known ACLD and 15 normal subjects) were tested for knee joint laxity using the Rolimeter. Each subject was measured at both 90 degrees and 30 degrees of knee flexion, by each of the six investigators. This was then repeated again by all six investigators so that inter-tester and intra-tester reliability could be examined. RESULTS: Results showed that there was good reliability between testers, and intra-tester reliability was good for both left and right knees in both 90 degrees and 30 degrees of flexion. Results also demonstrated a high level of sensitivity for determining knee joint laxity in ACLD compared to normal knees. CONCLUSION: The Rolimeter knee tester is a reliable device for quantifying knee joint laxity, and is sensitive enough to identify anterior cruciate ligament deficiency.

A new mechanical testing device for measuring anteroposterior knee laxity.

BACKGROUND: The authors assessed a new instrument, the Rolimeter, for the measurement of anteroposterior translation in the knee; it was compared to the KT-1000 arthrometer. PURPOSE: To determine if the Rolimeter offers a valid method for the measurement of anteroposterior translation that is as reproducible and reliable as the KT-1000 arthrometer. METHODS: Two of 3 observers examined 16 normal subjects (32 knees) and 36 patients (72 knees) with ligament ruptures twice, using both the Rolimeter and the KT-1000 arthrometers, 30 minutes apart. Total anteroposterior translation (manual maximal Lachman test) was recorded at 20 degrees and 80 degrees of knee flexion. RESULTS: On average, the Rolimeter measured approximately 1 mm less anteroposterior displacement than the KT-1000 arthrometer at manual maximum stress. Rolimeter measurements were more consistent than the KT-1000 measurements as measured by our observers. Specificity and sensitivity were equivalent between the Rolimeter and the KT-1000 arthrometer. CONCLUSIONS: The Rolimeter is as reproducible and reliable as the KT-1000 arthrometer. It offers a valid method for the measurement of anteroposterior translation in the knee. Higher accuracy was obtained at 20 degrees of flexion for the KT-1000 arthrometer and at 80 degrees of flexion for the Rolimeter.