Derotational distal femoral osteotomy for patients with recurrent patellar instability and increased femoral antetorsion improves knee function and adequately treats both torsional and valgus malalignment.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the functional and radiological outcome following derotational distal femoral osteotomy (D-DFO) in patients with high-grade patellofemoral instability (PFI) and an associated increased femoral antetorsion (FA). It was hypothesized that D-DFO would lead to a good functional and radiological outcome, and that both torsional and coronal malalignment could be normalized. METHODS: Patients that underwent D-DFO between 06/2011 and 12/2018 for high-grade PFI with an increased FA (> 20°) were included. Patient-reported outcome measures (Visual Analog Scale [VAS] for pain, Kujala score, Lysholm score, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form [IKDC], and Tegner Activity Scale [TAS]) were evaluated pre- and minimum 24 months postoperatively. Magnetic resonance imaging of the lower extremity and weight-bearing whole-leg anteroposterior radiographs were conducted pre- and postoperatively. The change in FA, coronal limb alignment, and PROMs were tested for statistical significance. RESULTS: In total, 27 patients (30 knees) were included. The D-DFO aimed to only correct FA (Group 1) or to additionally perform a varization (Group 2) in 14 cases each. In the remaining two cases, double-level osteotomies were performed to correct additional tibial deformities. In 25 cases (83.3%), concomitant procedures also addressing patellofemoral instability were performed. At follow-up (38.0 months [25-75% interquartile range 31.8-52.5 months]), a significant reduction in pain (VAS for pain: 2.0 [1.0-5.0] vs. 0 [0-1.0], p < 0.05), significant improvement in knee function (Kujala Score: 55.6 ± SD 13.6 vs. 80.3 ± 16.7, p < 0.05; Lysholm Score: 58.6 ± 17.4 vs. 79.5 ± 16.6, p < 0.05; IKDC: 54.6 ± 18.7 vs. 74.1 ± 15.0, p < 0.05), and an increase in sporting activity (TAS: 3.0 [3.0-4.0] vs. 4.0 [3.0-5.0], p = n.s.) were reported. Femoral antetorsion was significantly reduced (28.2 ± 6.4° vs. 13.6 ± 5.2°, p < 0.05). A significant varization was observed in Group 2 (2.4 ± 1.2° valgus vs. 0.3 ± 2.4° valgus; p < 0.05). In one case, patellar redislocation occurred 70 months postoperatively. CONCLUSION: In patients with PFI and an associated increased FA, D-DFO achieved a significant reduction in pain, an improvement of subjective knee function, as well as an adequate correction of torsional and coronal alignment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective case series, Level IV.

Clinical outcome and healing rate after meniscal bucket handle tear repair.

BACKGROUND: Reports combining patient-reported outcome measures, clinical evaluation, and radiographic assessment of postoperative healing after arthroscopic repair of bucket-handle meniscal tears (BHMT) are scarce. METHODS: Patients who underwent arthroscopic repair for acute traumatic BHMTs between October 2011 and March 2016 with a minimum follow-up of two years were included. Postoperative outcome scores comprised the International Knee Documentation Society Score (IKDC), Lysholm score, Tegner activity score (TAS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Clinical meniscal healing failure was assessed according to Barrett's criteria. Side-to-side difference in knee laxity was measured using KT-2000. Radiographic healing was assessed by 3-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and classified according to Henning's criteria at final follow-up. RESULTS: Forty patients with a mean age of 32.0 ± 11.5 years were available for follow-up after 51.8 ± 14.3 months. Revision surgery by means of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy was performed in four patients (10%) prior to the follow-up visit. The clinical healing rate was 83.3% at final follow-up. Mean IKDC score was 82.8 ± 13.8 and Lysholm score was 77.4 ± 24.8. Of all patients, 87.5% reached or exceeded the patient-acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) criteria for the IKDC score at final follow-up. The median TAS was 6 and VAS for pain was 0.46 ± 0.9. Side-to-side difference in knee laxity was higher in patients with concomitant ACL reconstruction (2.1 ± 2.7 mm) compared to isolated BHMTs (1.0 ± 2.0 mm). MR examination showed 69.4% healed, 25.0% partially healed, and 5.6% unhealed menisci. CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent repair for acute traumatic BHMTs achieved good to excellent clinical outcome along with a high rate of meniscal healing at a minimum follow-up of two years. Clinical and radiological healing rates were similarly satisfactory and most patients exceeded the PASS criteria for the IKDC score. Patients were able to reach a high postoperative activity level. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Case Series; IV.

Germany has a high demand in meniscal allograft transplantation but is subject to health economic and legal challenges: a survey of the German Knee Society.

PURPOSE: To determine the current status and demand of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) in Germany among members of the German Knee Society (= Deutsche Kniegesellschaft; DKG). METHODS: An online survey was conducted between May 2021 and June 2021 and sent to all members of the DKG. The survey questionnaire consisted of 19 questions to determine the demand and technical aspects of MAT among the participants and to identify areas of improvement in MAT in Germany. RESULTS: Overall, 152 participants, 136 (89.5%) from Germany, 8 (5.3%) from Switzerland, 6 (4.0%) from Austria, and 2 (1.3%) from other countries completed the online survey, with the majority working in non-academic institutions. According to the regulations of the DKG, 87 (57.2%) participants were board certified as specialized knee surgeons and 97 (63.8%) worked primarily in the field of orthopedic sports medicine. MAT was considered clinically necessary in Germany by 139 (91.5%) participants. Patient age (83.6%), post-meniscectomy syndrome in isolated lateral (79.6%) and medial (71.7%) meniscus deficiency, and functional and athletic demands (43.4%) were the most important determinants to consider MAT in patients. Participants reported that reimbursement (82.9%), jurisdiction over the use of donor grafts (77.6%), and the availability of meniscal allografts (76.3%) are the main challenges in performing MAT in Germany. The most frequently used meniscal allograft types by 54 (35.5%) participants who had already performed MAT were fresh-frozen grafts (56.6%), peracetic acid-ethanol sterilized grafts (35.9%), and cryopreserved grafts (7.6%). Participants reported to perform suture-only fixation more often than bone block fixation for both medial (73.6% vs. 22.6%) and lateral (69.8% vs. 24.5%) MAT. CONCLUSION: More than 90% of the responding members of the DKG indicated that MAT is a clinically important and valuable procedure in Germany. Reimbursement, jurisdiction over the use of donor grafts, and the availability of meniscal allografts should be improved. This survey is intended to support future efforts to facilitate MAT in daily clinical practice in Germany. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

The lack of retropatellar resurfacing at index surgery is significantly associated with failure in patients following patellofemoral inlay arthroplasty: a multi-center study of more than 260 patients.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up following contemporary patellofemoral inlay arthroplasty (PFIA) and to identify potential risk factors for failure in a multi-center study. METHODS: All patients who underwent implantation of PFIA between 09/2009 and 11/2016 at 11 specialized orthopedic referral centers were enrolled in the study and were evaluated retrospectively at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Clinical outcomes included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), the Tegner Scale, the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and subjective patient satisfaction. Pre- and perioperative risk factors were compared among failures and non-failures to determine potential risk factors. RESULTS: A total of 263 patients (85% follow-up rate) could be enrolled. The mean age at the time of index surgery was 49 ± 12 years with a mean postoperative follow-up of 45 ± 18 months. The overall failure rate was 11% (28 patients), of which 18% (5 patients) were patients with patella resurfacing at index surgery and 82% (23 patients) were patients without initial patella resurfacing. At final follow-up, 93% of the patients who did not fail were satisfied with the procedure with a mean transformed WOMAC Score of 84.5 ± 14.5 points, a mean KOOS Score of 73.3 ± 17.1 points, a mean Tegner Score of 3.4 ± 1.4 points and a mean VAS pain of 2.4 ± 2.0 points. An increased BMI was significantly correlated with a worse postoperative outcome. Concomitant procedures addressing patellofemoral instability or malalignment, the lack of patellofemoral resurfacing at the index surgery and a high BMI were significantly correlated with failure in our patient cohort. CONCLUSION: Patellofemoral inlay arthroplasty shows high patient satisfaction with good functional outcomes at short-term follow-up and thus can be considered a viable treatment option in young patients suffering from isolated patellofemoral arthritis. Patellar resurfacing at index surgery is recommended to decrease the risk of failure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective case series, Level IV.

[Posterior meniscus root tears]. / Posteriore Wurzelverletzungen der Menisken.

Meniscus root tears are radial tears in the region of the posterior insertion zones. Medial root injuries usually occur in individuals > 50 years of age without adequate trauma and are associated with obesity and varus deformities. The root lesion leads to a loss of ring tension, which results in extrusion of the meniscus and a strong increase in joint pressure that is biomechanically equivalent to a complete meniscectomy. When indicating arthroscopic transosseous refixation of the medial root lesion, factors such as accompanying cartilage damage, osteoarthritis, obesity and varus deformity must be taken into account. Injuries to the root of the lateral meniscus are mostly observed in younger patients in combination with a rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament. Arthroscopic transosseous refixation in combination with cruciate ligament surgery is therefore also recommended for type I and type II lesions. In summary, both the medial and the lateral root lesions of the menisci are injuries with high biomechanical relevance.

Comparing Knee Laxity After Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using Quadriceps Tendon Versus Semitendinosus Tendon Graft.

BACKGROUND: The choice of graft in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is still under discussion. The hamstrings are currently the most used grafts for primary ACL reconstruction in Europe. However, increased interest has arisen in the quadriceps tendon (QT) as an alternative autologous graft option for primary ACL reconstruction. PURPOSE: To evaluate knee stability and the subjective outcome after ACL reconstruction using either autologous QT graft in implant-free femoral press-fit fixation technique or semitendinosus tendon (ST) graft. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: We evaluated 50 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction, including 25 patients who received autologous ipsilateral QT graft (QT group) and 25 patients who received the ipsilateral ST graft (ST group). The follow-up for this prospective comparative study was at least 2 years after surgery, comprising KT-1000 arthrometer testing, pivot-shift test, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Lysholm score, and rerupture rate. RESULTS: The mean patient age was 31.72 years (9 women, 16 men) in the QT group and 32.08 years (13 women, 12 men) in the ST group. The mean ± standard deviation postoperative side-to-side difference assessed using KT-1000 arthrometer was 1.56 ± 1.56 mm for the QT group and 1.64 ± 1.41 mm for the ST group, with no significant difference. No significant difference was found on any of the KOOS subscale scores (P = .694) or the Lysholm score (P = .682). No rerupture or positive pivot-shift test occurred during follow-up. No difference was found in donor-site morbidity between the study groups. CONCLUSION: Clinical outcomes were not significantly different between QT and ST grafts in the current study. Thus, the QT may serve as a good alternative graft for primary ACL reconstruction.

Treatment after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group.

Treatment strategies for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best practice guidelines for the management of ACL injury is to a large extent based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance towards consensus opinions regarding the best available evidence on operative versus non-operative treatment for ACL injury.The purpose of this study was to report the consensus statements on operative versus non-operative treatment of ACL injuries developed at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium 2019. Sixty-six international experts on the management of ACL injuries, representing 18 countries, convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Proposed consensus statements were drafted by the Scientific Organising Committee and Session Chairs for the three working groups. Panel participants reviewed preliminary statements prior to the meeting and provided initial agreement and comments on the statement via online survey. During the meeting, discussion and debate occurred for each statement, after which a final vote was then held. Eighty per cent agreement was defined a priori as consensus. A total of 11 of 13 statements on operative veresus non-operative treatment of ACL injury reached consensus during the symposium. Nine statements achieved unanimous support; two reached strong consensus; one did not achieve consensus; and one was removed due to redundancy in the information provided.In highly active patients engaged in jumping, cutting and pivoting sports, early anatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is recommended due to the high risk of secondary meniscus and cartilage injuries with delayed surgery, although a period of progressive rehabilitation to resolve impairments and improve neuromuscular function is recommended. For patients who seek to return to straight plane activities, non-operative treatment with structured, progressive rehabilitation is an acceptable treatment option. However, with persistent functional instability or when episodes of giving way occur, anatomical ACLR is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field will assist clinicians in deciding between operative and non-operative treatment with patients after an ACL injury.Level of evidence: V.

Treatment after ACL injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group.

Treatment strategies for ACL injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best practice guidelines to manage ACL injury is largely based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened determine consensus regarding best available evidence on operative versus non-operative treatment for ACL injury. The purpose of this study is to report the consensus statements on operative versus non-operative treatment of ACL injuries developed at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium 2019. Sixty-six international experts on the management of ACL injuries, representing 18 countries, convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Proposed consensus statements were drafted by the Scientific Organising Committee and Session Chairs. Panel participants reviewed preliminary statements prior to the meeting and provided initial agreement and comments on the statement via online survey. During the meeting, discussion and debate occurred for each statement, after which a final vote was then held. Eighty per cent agreement was defined a priori as consensus. A total of 11 of 13 statements on operative versus non-operative treatment of ACL injury reached consensus during the Symposium. Nine statements achieved unanimous support, two reached strong consensus, one did not achieve consensus, and one was removed due to redundancy in the information provided. In highly active patients engaged in jumping, cutting and pivoting sports, early anatomical ACL reconstruction is recommended due to the high risk of secondary meniscus and cartilage injuries with delayed surgery, although a period of progressive rehabilitation to resolve impairments and improve neuromuscular function is recommended. For patients who seek to return to straight plane activities, non-operative treatment with structured, progressive rehabilitation is an acceptable treatment option. However, with persistent functional instability, or when episodes of giving way occur, anatomical ACL reconstruction is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field may assist clinicians in deciding between operative and non-operative treatment with patients after an ACL injury Level of evidence: Level V.

Dynamic Q-angle is increased in patients with chronic patellofemoral instability and correlates positively with femoral torsion.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the frontal gait patterns in patients with chronic patellofemoral instability compared to healthy controls. The hypothesis was that internal-rotation-adduction moment of the knee as altered dynamic Q-angle is evident in patients and correlates positively with increased femoral torsion. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with symptomatic recurrent patellofemoral instability requiring surgical treatment were matched for average age, sex, and body mass index with 15 healthy controls (30 knees). Several clinical and radiographic measurements were taken from each participant: internal and external rotation (hipIR, hipER), Q-angle, tubercle sulcus angle (TS-angle), femoral antetorsion (femAT), tibial tubercle-trochlear groove (TT-TG) distance, and frontal leg axis. Additionally, three frontal gait patterns were defined and recorded: (1) internal-rotation-adduction moment of the knee during normal walking, (2) dynamic valgus of the knee, and (3) Trendelenburg's sign in a single-leg squat. Randomized videography was evaluated by three independent blinded observers. Statistical analysis was performed using regression models and comparisons of gait patterns and clinical and radiological measurements. Furthermore, observer reliability was correlated to gradings of radiological parameters. RESULTS: Patients showed altered dynamic Q-angle gait pattern during normal walking (p < 0.001) compared to healthy controls (interrater kappa = 0.61), whereas highest observer agreement was reported if femAT was greater than 20° (kappa = 0.85). Logistic regression model revealed higher femAT (18.2° ± 12.5 versus 11.9° ± 7.0 (p = 0.004) as a significant variable, as well as lower TT-TG distance (23.6 mm ± 2.8 vs. 16.6 mm ± 4.9, p = 0.004) on evident dynamic Q-angle gait pattern. Dynamic valgus in a single-leg squat was observed significantly more often in patients (p < 0.001) compared to controls (interrater kappa = 0.7). However, besides the static measured Q-angle as the only significant variable on evident dynamic valgus pattern (13.6° ± 4.6 vs. 10.3° ± 5.2, p = 0.003), no radiological parameter was detected to correlate significantly with dynamic valgus and Trendelenburg's sign (n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical detection of pathologic torsion and bony alignment may be difficult in patients with patellofemoral instability. The present study demonstrated that dynamic Q-angle gait pattern is significantly altered in patients with chronic patellofemoral instability compared to healthy controls. Moreover, dynamic Q-angle correlates positively with higher femoral torsion and negatively with higher TT-TG distance. Therefore, clinical and radiological assessment of maltorsion should be added to the standard diagnostic workup in cases of patellofemoral instability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Clinical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament injury: panther symposium ACL injury clinical outcomes consensus group.

PURPOSE: A stringent outcome assessment is a key aspect for establishing evidence-based clinical guidelines for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury treatment. The aim of this consensus statement was to establish what data should be reported when conducting an ACL outcome study, what specific outcome measurements should be used and at what follow-up time those outcomes should be assessed. METHODS: To establish a standardized approach to assessment of clinical outcome after ACL treatment, a consensus meeting including a multidisciplinary group of ACL experts was held at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium, Pittsburgh, PA; USA, in June 2019. The group reached consensus on nine statements by using a modified Delphi method. RESULTS: In general, outcomes after ACL treatment can be divided into four robust categories-early adverse events, patient-reported outcomes, ACL graft failure/recurrent ligament disruption and clinical measures of knee function and structure. A comprehensive assessment following ACL treatment should aim to provide a complete overview of the treatment result, optimally including the various aspects of outcome categories. For most research questions, a minimum follow-up of 2 years with an optimal follow-up rate of 80% is necessary to achieve a comprehensive assessment. This should include clinical examination, any sustained re-injuries, validated knee-specific PROs and Health-Related Quality of Life questionnaires. In the mid- to long-term follow-up, the presence of osteoarthritis should be evaluated. CONCLUSION: This consensus paper provides practical guidelines for how the aforementioned entities of outcomes should be reported and suggests the preferred tools for a reliable and valid assessment of outcome after ACL treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V.

Treatment After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group.

Treatment strategies for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best-practice guidelines for the management of ACL injury is to a large extent based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance toward consensus opinions regarding the best available evidence on operative versus nonoperative treatment for ACL injury. The purpose of this study was to report the consensus statements on operative versus nonoperative treatment of ACL injuries developed at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium 2019. There were 66 international experts on the management of ACL injuries, representing 18 countries, who were convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Proposed consensus statements were drafted by the scientific organizing committee and session chairs for the 3 working groups. Panel participants reviewed preliminary statements before the meeting and provided initial agreement and comments on the statement via online survey. During the meeting, discussion and debate occurred for each statement, after which a final vote was then held. Ultimately, 80% agreement was defined a priori as consensus. A total of 11 of 13 statements on operative versus nonoperative treatment of ACL injury reached consensus during the symposium. Overall, 9 statements achieved unanimous support, 2 reached strong consensus, 1 did not achieve consensus, and 1 was removed because of redundancy in the information provided. In highly active patients engaged in jumping, cutting, and pivoting sports, early anatomic ACL reconstruction is recommended because of the high risk of secondary meniscal and cartilage injuries with delayed surgery, although a period of progressive rehabilitation to resolve impairments and improve neuromuscular function is recommended. For patients who seek to return to straight-plane activities, nonoperative treatment with structured, progressive rehabilitation is an acceptable treatment option. However, with persistent functional instability, or when episodes of giving way occur, anatomic ACL reconstruction is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field will assist clinicians in deciding between operative and nonoperative treatment with patients after an ACL injury.

Patient-Reported and Quantitative Outcomes of Anatomic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Hamstring Tendon Autografts.

BACKGROUND: The pivot-shift test has become more consistent and reliable and is a meaningful outcome measurement after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this investigation was to assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and the quantitative pivot shift (QPS) preoperatively, at time zero immediately after anatomic ACLR, and after 24 months as well as the relationship between PROs and the QPS. It was hypothesized that anatomic ACLR would restore rotatory stability measured by the pivot-shift test and that QPS measurements would be positively correlated with PROs. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: The ACL-injured and contralateral uninjured knees from 89 of 107 (83.2%) enrolled patients at 4 international centers were evaluated using a standardized pivot-shift test. Tibial acceleration was assessed with an inertial sensor, and lateral compartment translation was measured using an image analysis system preoperatively, at time zero immediately postoperatively, and at follow-up after 2 years. PROs were assessed at 12 and 24 months postoperatively with the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form, Cincinnati Knee Rating System (CKRS), Marx activity rating scale, and activity of daily living score (ADLS). RESULTS: The mean patient age at surgery was 27 years (range, 15-45 years). A positive pivot shift preoperatively (side-to-side difference in tibial acceleration, 2.6 ± 4.0 m/s2; side-to-side difference in anterior tibial translation, 2.0 ± 2.0 mm) was reduced at time zero postoperatively (side-to-side difference in tibial acceleration, -0.5 ± 1.3 m/s2; side-to-side difference in anterior tibial translation, -0.1 ± 1.0 mm). All PROs improved from preoperatively to final follow-up at 24 months: from 56.5 to 85.5 points for the IKDC (P = .0001), from 28.8 to 32.4 points for the CKRS (P = .04), from 11.2 to 7.9 points for the Marx (P < .0001), and from 75.7 to 91.6 points for the ADLS (P < .0001). Neither preoperative nor time zero postoperative rotatory laxity assessed by the pivot-shift test correlated with PROs at 24-month follow-up. A graft retear was observed in 4 patients (4.5%) within 2 years of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Anatomic ACLR resulted in significantly improved and acceptable PROs at 2-year follow-up and a low failure rate. Anatomic ACLR restored QPS measurements of anterior tibial translation and tibial acceleration to those of the contralateral knee immediately after surgery while still under anesthesia, but there was no correlation between the QPS preoperatively or at time zero after ACLR and PROs at 2-year follow-up.

Treatment after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group.

Treatment strategies for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best practice guidelines for the management of ACL injury is to a large extent based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance toward consensus opinions regarding the best available evidence on operative vs. non-operative treatment for ACL injury. The purpose of this study is to report the consensus statements on operative vs. non-operative treatment of ACL injuries developed at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium 2019. Sixty-six international experts on the management of ACL injuries, representing 18 countries, were convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Proposed consensus statements were drafted by the Scientific Organizing Committee and Session Chairs for the three working groups. Panel participants reviewed preliminary statements prior to the meeting and provided the initial agreement and comments on the statement via an online survey. During the meeting, discussion and debate occurred for each statement, after which a final vote was then held. Eighty percent agreement was defined a-priori as consensus. A total of 11 of 13 statements on operative v. non-operative treatment of ACL injury reached the consensus during the Symposium. Nine statements achieved unanimous support, two reached strong consensus, one did not achieve consensus, and one was removed due to redundancy in the information provided. In highly active patients engaged in jumping, cutting, and pivoting sports, early anatomic ACL reconstruction is recommended due to the high risk of secondary meniscus and cartilage injuries with delayed surgery, although a period of progressive rehabilitation to resolve impairments and improve neuromuscular function is recommended. For patients who seek to return to straight plane activities, non-operative treatment with structured, progressive rehabilitation is an acceptable treatment option. However, with persistent functional instability, or when episodes of giving way occur, anatomic ACL reconstruction is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field will assist clinicians in deciding between operative and non-operative treatments with patients after an ACL injury.Level of evidence V.

Return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group.

PURPOSE: A precise and consistent definition of return to sport (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is lacking, and there is controversy surrounding the process of returning patients to sports and their previous activity level. The aim of the Panther Symposium ACL Injury RTS Consensus Group was to provide a clear definition of RTS and description of the RTS continuum, as well as to provide clinical guidance on RTS testing and decision-making. METHODS: An international, multidisciplinary group of ACL experts convened as part of a consensus meeting. Consensus statements were developed using a modified Delphi method. Literature review was performed to report the supporting evidence. RESULTS: Key points include that RTS is characterized by achievement of the pre-injury level of sport and involves a criteria-based progression from return to participation to return to sport, and ultimately return to performance. Purely time-based RTS decision-making should be abandoned. Progression occurs along a RTS continuum with decision-making by a multidisciplinary group that incorporates objective physical examination data and validated and peer-reviewed RTS tests, which should involve functional assessment as well as psychological readiness. Consideration should be given to biological healing, contextual factors and concomitant injuries. CONCLUSION: The resultant consensus statements and scientific rationale aim to inform the reader of the complex process of RTS after ACL injury that occurs along a dynamic continuum. Research is needed to determine the ideal RTS test battery, the best implementation of psychological readiness testing and methods for the biologic assessment of healing and recovery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Quadriceps tendon anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Quadriceps tendon is a promising alternative graft option for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, which can be harvested with or without a bone block as well as a full or partial thickness graft. Therefore, quadriceps tendon graft could be used in primary and revision ACL reconstruction based on the requirements (tunnel size, tunnel position, etc.). The all soft tissue, partial thickness quadriceps tendon graft in detail and pitfalls of the harvest are described in the present review. After quadriceps tendon harvest, especially in soccer players, who need a strong quadriceps to strike a ball with power, the postoperative rehabilitation may need to be adapted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V.

Varus alignment increases medial meniscus extrusion and peak contact pressure: a biomechanical study.

PURPOSE: Assessment of medial meniscus extrusion (MME) has become increasingly popular in clinical practice to evaluate the dynamic meniscus function and diagnose meniscus pathologies. The purpose of this biomechanical study was to investigate the correlation between MME and the changes in joint contact pressure in varus and valgus alignment. It was hypothesized that varus alignment would result in significantly higher MME along with a higher joint contact pressure in the medial compartment. METHODS: Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric knees were axially loaded, with a 750 N compressive load, in full extension with the mechanical axis shifted to intersect the tibial plateau at 30% and 40% (varus), 50% (neutral), 60% and 70% (valgus) of its width (TPW). Tibiofemoral peak contact pressure (PCP), mean contact pressure (MCP) and contact area (CA) were determined using pressure-sensitive films. MME was obtained via ultrasound at maximum load. RESULTS: MME was significantly increased from valgus (1.32 ± 0.22 mm) to varus alignment (3.16 ± 0.24 mm; p < 0.001). Peak contact pressure at 30% TPW varus alignment was significantly higher compared to 60% TPW valgus (p = 0.018) and 70% TPW valgus (p < 0.01). MME significantly correlated with PCP (r = 0.56; p < 0.001) and MCP (r = 0.47, p < 0.01) but not with CA (r = 0.23; n.s.). CONCLUSION: MME was significantly increased in varus alignment, compared to neutral or valgus alignment, with an intact medial meniscus. It was also significantly correlated with PCP and MCP within the medial compartment. However, valgus malalignment and neutral axis resulted in reduced MME and contact pressure. Lower limb alignment must be taken into account while assessing MME in clinical practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Controlled laboratory study.

Rotatory Knee Laxity Exists on a Continuum in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to compare the magnitude of rotatory knee laxity in patients with a partial anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear, those with a complete ACL tear, and those who had undergone a failed ACL reconstruction. It was hypothesized that rotatory knee laxity would increase with increasing injury grade, with knees with partial ACL tears demonstrating the lowest rotatory laxity and knees that had undergone failed ACL reconstruction demonstrating the highest rotatory laxity. METHODS: A prospective multicenter study cohort of 354 patients who had undergone ACL reconstruction between 2012 and 2018 was examined. All patients had both injured and contralateral healthy knees evaluated using standardized, preoperative quantitative pivot shift testing, determined by a validated, image-based tablet software application and a surface-mounted accelerometer. Quantitative pivot shift was compared with the contralateral healthy knee in 20 patients with partial ACL tears, 257 patients with complete ACL tears, and 27 patients who had undergone a failed ACL reconstruction. Comparisons were made using 1-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post hoc 2-sample t tests with Bonferroni correction. Significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: There were stepwise increases in side-to-side differences in quantitative pivot shift in terms of lateral knee compartment translation for patients with partial ACL tears (mean [and standard deviation], 1.4 ± 1.5 mm), those with complete ACL tears (2.5 ± 2.1 mm), and those who had undergone failed ACL reconstruction (3.3 ± 1.9 mm) (p = 0.01) and increases in terms of lateral compartment acceleration for patients with partial ACL tears (0.7 ± 1.4 m/s), those with complete ACL tears (2.3 ± 3.1 m/s), and those who had undergone failed ACL reconstruction (2.4 ± 5.5 m/s) (p = 0.01). A significant difference in lateral knee compartment translation was found when comparing patients with partial ACL tears and those with complete ACL tears (1.2 ± 2.1 mm [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.2 to 2.1 mm]; p = 0.02) and patients with partial ACL tears and those who had undergone failed ACL reconstruction (1.9 ± 1.7 mm [95% CI, 0.8 to 2.9 mm]; p = 0.001), but not when comparing patients with complete ACL tears and those who had undergone failed ACL reconstruction (0.8 ± 2.1 [95% CI, -0.1 to 1.6 mm]; p = 0.09). Increased lateral compartment acceleration was found when comparing patients with partial ACL tears and those with complete ACL tears (1.5 ± 3.0 m/s [95% CI, 0.8 to 2.3 m/s]; p = 0.0002), but not when comparing patients with complete ACL tears and those who had undergone failed ACL reconstruction (0.1 ± 3.4 m/s [95% CI, -2.2 to 2.4 m/s]; p = 0.93) or patients with partial ACL tears and those who had undergone failed ACL reconstruction (1.7 ± 4.2 m/s [95% CI, -0.7 to 4.0 m/s]; p = 0.16). An increasing lateral compartment translation of the contralateral, ACL-healthy knee was found in patients with partial ACL tears (0.8 mm), those with complete ACL tears (1.2 mm), and those who had undergone failed ACL reconstruction (1.7 mm) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A progressive increase in rotatory knee laxity, defined by side-to-side differences in quantitative pivot shift, was observed in patients with partial ACL tears, those with complete ACL tears, and those who had undergone failed ACL reconstruction. These results may be helpful when assessing outcomes and considering indications for the management of high-grade rotatory knee laxity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

No dynamic extrusion of the medial meniscus in ultrasound examination in patients with confirmed root tear lesion.

PURPOSE: Extrusion of the medial meniscus evaluated on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been described as indirect radiological sign for meniscus root tears. However, ultrasound detectable dynamic extrusion is observed in normal physiological settings. The aim of the present study was to analyze the dynamic meniscal extrusion using ultrasound (US) examination in patients with MRI-confirmed meniscal root tears. The hypothesis was that dynamic meniscus extrusion is reduced in patients with medial root tear but not in the healthy meniscus. METHODS: Twenty-five patients with a medial root lesion of the meniscus (group I) and 25 healthy controls (group II) were enrolled in this study. The medial meniscus extrusion (MME) of the index knee was determined using ultrasound (US) in supine position and under full weight bearing. Standard knee MRI was used for determining whether the patients were eligible for this study according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, respectively. RESULTS: In group I, the mean MME was 3.6 mm (± 1.0 mm) in supine position and 3.7 mm (± 0.9 mm) under full weight bearing according to US measurements. The mean Δ-extrusion was 0.1 mm (± 0.2 mm) and the ratio was 1.0 (± 0.1). Mean medial meniscus extrusion on MRI was 3.9 mm (± 0.9 mm). In group II, mean MME was 1.3 mm (± 0.3 mm) in supine position (US) and 2.3 mm (± 0.4 mm) under full weight bearing (US). The mean Δ-extrusion was 1.0 mm (± 0.4 mm) and the extrusion ratio was 1.8 (± 0.4). In this group, mean extrusion in MRI was 1.4 mm (± 0.7 mm). The difference in mean ultrasound Δ-extrusion, ratio, and MRI extrusion between both groups was statistically significant (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of dynamic ultrasound examination of the medial meniscus, medial root tear leads to significantly decreased dynamic medial displacement of the meniscus compared to healthy meniscus status. The absence of dynamic meniscus extrusion may be an indicator for medial meniscus root injury and could be detected using ultrasound ("dead meniscus sign"). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.