Surgical Treatment of Osteochondral Lesions of the Tibial Plafond: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The literature on osteochondral lesions of the tibial plafond (OLTPs) is sparse. The aim of this study was therefore to provide an overview of clinical and radiological outcomes following treatment of OLTPs. METHODS: We performed a systematic search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane library databases. The review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines and included all original articles on treatment outcomes for OLTPs. The methodological quality of the articles was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). Baseline patient and lesion characteristics were pooled and weighted according to the number of lesions per study. The primary outcome was any clinical or patient-reported outcome measure pooled by treatment method when separable data were available. Secondary outcomes were complications, reoperation rates, radiological outcomes, and sport outcomes. RESULTS: The search yielded 2,079 articles, of which 10 studies (1 prospective case series, 1 retrospective comparative study, and 8 retrospective case series) with a total of 175 patients were included. The overall methodological quality of the studies was low. All patients were treated surgically; 96% of the lesions were primary cases (i.e., first-time surgery) and 58% were solitary tibial lesions (i.e., no opposing talar lesion). Arthroscopic bone marrow stimulation was the most frequently used treatment strategy (51%), followed by cartilage transplantation (17%), chondrogenesis-inducing techniques (11%), osteochondral transplantation (3%), retrograde drilling (3%), and mixed (i.e., inseparable) treatments (15%). The clinical outcomes of the different surgical therapies were considered to be moderate to good. The pooled postoperative AOFAS (American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society) score for bone marrow stimulation and osteochondral transplantation was 54.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.5 to 85.0) (n = 14) and 85.3 (95% CI, 56 to 100) (n = 3), respectively. Overall, complications and reoperations were rarely reported. The pooled complication and reoperation rates could only be calculated for bone marrow stimulation and were 5% and 7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical interventions for OLTPs appear to yield moderate to good clinical outcomes. Bone marrow stimulation resulted in a moderate AOFAS score. Complications and reintervention rates were found to be low. The current evidence in the literature is limited because of the underreporting of clinical, radiological, and sport data and the heterogenous outcome scores reported. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Adequate union rates for the treatment of acute proximal fifth metatarsal fractures.

PURPOSE: To compare the bone healing, clinical, and return to daily activity outcomes after either surgical or conservative management of acute zone 1, 2, and 3 fifth metatarsal fractures. METHODS: A literature search was performed to identify studies published from the earliest record to January 2019 using EMBASE (Ovid), MEDLINE via PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science. All articles assessing clinical outcomes of acute proximal fifth metatarsal fractures were included. Bone healing and clinical outcomes were thereafter calculated using a simplified pooling method. RESULTS: Thirty-two articles comprising of a total of 1,239 fractures were included, of which one was a randomized controlled trial, seven were prospective studies, and 24 were retrospective studies. 627 zone 1 fractures demonstrated union rates of 93.2% following conservative treatment and 95.1% following surgical treatment. Conservatively managed zone 1 fractures were displaced 49.5% of the time, compared to a rate of 92.8% for the surgically treated cases. For Jones' (zone 2) fractures, bone healing outcomes of conservative versus surgical treatment showed union rates of 77.4% versus 96.3%, refracture rates of 2.4% versus 2.1%, and mean time to union of 11.0 weeks versus 9.4 weeks, respectively. Only ten proximal diaphyseal (zone 3) fractures were reported, with a mean return to work of 8.2 weeks. CONCLUSION: Acute zone 1 fractures are preferably treated conservatively as similar union rates were found after both conservative and surgical management. In contradistinction, acute zone 2 fractures demonstrate higher union rates and faster time to union when treated surgically. The outcomes of acute zone 3 fractures are rarely reported in the literature, so treatment recommendations remain unclear. Further research of proximal fifth metatarsal fractures is warranted to provide more definitive conclusions, but current findings can aid surgeons during the shared clinical decision making process. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.