RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction is well described for patellar instability, the utility of arthroscopy at the time of stabilization has not been fully defined. PURPOSE: To determine whether diagnostic arthroscopy in conjunction with MPFL reconstruction is associated with improvement in functional outcome, pain, and stability or a decrease in perioperative complications. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary MPFL reconstruction without tibial tubercle osteotomy were reviewed (96 patients, 101 knees). Knees were divided into MPFL reconstruction without arthroscopy (n = 37), MPFL reconstruction with diagnostic arthroscopy (n = 41), and MPFL reconstruction with a targeted arthroscopic procedure (n = 23). Postoperative pain, motion, imaging, operative findings, perioperative complications, need for revision procedure, and postoperative Kujala scores were recorded. RESULTS: Pain at 2 weeks and 3 months postoperatively was similar between groups. Significantly improved knee flexion at 2 weeks was seen after MPFL reconstruction without arthroscopy versus reconstruction with diagnostic and reconstruction with targeted arthroscopic procedures (58° vs 42° and 48°, respectively; P = .02). Significantly longer tourniquet times were seen for targeted arthroscopic procedures versus the diagnostic and no arthroscopic procedures (73 vs 57 and 58 min, respectively; P = .0002), and significantly higher Kujala scores at follow-up were recorded after MPFL reconstruction without arthroscopy versus reconstruction with diagnostic and targeted arthroscopic procedures (87.8 vs 80.2 and 70.1, respectively; P = .05; 42% response rate). There was no difference between groups in knee flexion, recurrent instability, or perioperative complications at 3 months. Diagnostic arthroscopy yielded findings not previously appreciated on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in 35% of patients, usually resulting in partial meniscectomy. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic arthroscopy with MPFL reconstruction may result in findings not previously appreciated on MRI. Postoperative pain, range of motion, and risk of complications were equal at 3 months postoperatively with or without arthroscopy. Despite higher Kujala scores in MPFL reconstruction without arthroscopy, the relationship between arthroscopy and patient-reported outcomes remains unclear. Surgeons can consider diagnostic arthroscopy but should be aware of no clear benefits in patient outcomes.
RESUMO
Background: Although the rate of non-fatal gunshot wounds (GSW) has increased, few studies have compared the effectiveness of operative and nonoperative treatment with specific focus on infection. We compared the risk of septic arthritis in patients with traumatic arthrotomies caused by GSW treated operatively with irrigation and debridement versus nonoperatively with antibiotics and wound care. Methods: From 2009 to 2016, 46 patients at our institution sustained traumatic arthrotomies from low-velocity GSW with at least 90-day follow-up. Medical records were reviewed for demographic information, imaging, type and duration of antibiotics, details of operative and nonoperative interventions, and evidence of infection at follow-up visits. We measured the rate of septic arthritis using a 2-tailed t test. Results: The knee was the most commonly affected joint (34 patients; 73.9%). Eight patients (17.4%) were treated nonoperatively and 38 (82.6%) were treated operatively. In the nonoperative group, one patient (12.5%) developed a superficial wound infection that resolved with oral antibiotics. In the operative group, one patient (2.6%) developed a superficial wound infection requiring operative irrigation and debridement. There was no statistically significant difference in risk of infection between the two groups (P = 0.32). No patient developed septic arthritis. Conclusions: In select patients, nonoperative treatment with wound care and antibiotics may be sufficient for preventing infection after GSW-related traumatic arthrotomies. Findings of randomized studies and treatment algorithms are needed to further evaluate this relatively common injury.Level of Evidence: IV.