Initial Evaluation and Classification of Knee Dislocations.

The traumatic knee dislocation (KD) is a complex condition resulting in injury to >1 ligament or ligament complexes about the knee, termed multiligament knee injuries. Typically, KDs result in injury to both cruciate ligaments with variable injury to collateral ligament complexes. Very rarely, KD may occur with single cruciate injuries combined with collateral involvement but it is important to understand that not all multiligament knee injuries are KDs. Patients can present in a wide spectrum of severity; from frank dislocation of the tibiofemoral joint to a spontaneously reduced KD, either with or without neurovascular injury. The initial evaluation of these injuries should include a thorough patient history and physical examination, with particularly close attention to vascular status which has the most immediate treatment implications. Multiple classification systems have been developed for KDs, with the anatomic classification having the most practical application.

Critical Evaluation of the Methodologic Quality of the Top 50 Cited Articles Relating to Knee Dislocation and Multiligamentous Knee Injury.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have evaluated the management of knee dislocations (KDs) and multiligamentous knee injuries (MLKIs). However, no study to date has analyzed the quality of the most cited articles in this literature. HYPOTHESIS: There is a positive correlation between the number of article citations in the KD and MLKI literature and their methodologic quality. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: The Web of Science online database was searched to identify the top 50 cited articles in KD and MLKI care. Demographic data were recorded for each study. The Modified Coleman Methodology Score (MCMS) and the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) were used to analyze the methodological quality of each article. Spearman correlation coefficients (r s) were then calculated. RESULTS: The articles identified were published between 1958 and 2015 in a wide variety of peer-reviewed journals (n = 16). The majority of study level of evidence (LOE) was of low quality (level 5, 16%; level 4, 54%; level 3, 16%; level 2, 14%). There were no studies of level 1 evidence. The mean MCMS and MINORS scores were 29.0 (SD, 19.1; range, 3-72) and 6.1 (SD, 3.7; range, 0-14), respectively. No significant correlation was identified between the number of citations and the publication year, LOE, MCMS, or MINORS (r s = 0.123 [P = .396]; r s = 0.125 [P = .389]; r s = 0.182 [P = .204]; and r s = 0.175 [P = .224], respectively). Positive correlations were observed between improved MCMS and MINORS scores and more recent year of publication (r s = 0.43 [P = .002]; r s = 0.32 [P = .022]) as well as improved study LOE (r s = 0.65 [P < .001]; r s = 0.67 [P < .001]). CONCLUSION: The top 50 cited articles on KD and MLKI care consisted of low LOE and methodological quality, with no existing level 1 articles. There was no significant correlation between the number of citations and publication year, LOE, or study methodological quality. Positive correlations were observed between later publication date and improved methodological quality.

Femoral Origin of the Anterolateral Ligament: An Anatomic Analysis.

PURPOSE: To determine the location and variability of the anterolateral ligament (ALL) femoral origin. METHODS: The ALL was dissected and examined in 52 embalmed specimens, and the femoral origin was isolated. The presence of a bony or soft-tissue attachment, the relation to the lateral collateral ligament, the average diameter of the proximal origin, and the specific location of the origin relative to the lateral femoral epicondyle were recorded. RESULTS: The ALL was present in all 52 specimens, with a mean diameter of 11.85 mm, and was consistently attached to bone in all specimens. The ALL consistently overlapped the lateral collateral ligament near its attachment, with the location of the origin directly on the lateral epicondyle in 12 specimens (23%), with a shared lateral femoral condyle and with the origin slightly posterior and proximal to the lateral epicondyle in 30 specimens (58%), and with the origin completely posterior and proximal to the lateral epicondyle in 10 specimens (19%). CONCLUSIONS: The ALL showed a consistent bony origin overlapping the lateral collateral ligament in all specimens, with some variability in the femoral attachment, ranging from directly on the lateral epicondyle to posterior to the lateral epicondyle. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The identification and description of the femoral origin of the ALL are crucial in understanding its role in the stability of the knee, as well as determining the appropriate position for the femoral origin placement in ALL reconstruction.

Posterior meniscus root tears: associated pathologies to assist as diagnostic tools.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate associated pathologies identified at arthroscopy in patients with meniscus root tears. METHODS: This study was Institutional Review Board approved. All patients who underwent arthroscopic knee surgery where a complete meniscus root tear was identified were included in this study. Concurrent ligament tears and articular cartilage changes ≥Outerbridge grade 2 were recorded and stored in a data registry. RESULTS: Fifty patients (28 males, 22 females) [mean age = 36.5 years (range 17.1-68.1 years)] who were diagnosed with a medial or lateral meniscus root tear at arthroscopy were included in this study out of 673 arthroscopic surgeries (prevalence 7.4 %). Twenty-three (46 %) patients had a medial meniscus root tear, 26 (52 %) patients had a lateral meniscus root tear and one (2 %) patient had both. Thirty-four per cent of patients (n = 17) underwent partial meniscectomy, while 60 % (n = 31) underwent suture repair. During arthroscopy, 60 % (n = 30) of patients were diagnosed with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear. Patients with lateral meniscus root tears were 10.3 times (95 % CI 2.6-42.5) more likely to have ACL tears than patients with medial meniscus root tears (p = 0.012). Patients who had medial meniscus root tears were 5.8 times (95 % CI 1.6-20.5) more likely to have chondral defects than patients who had lateral meniscus root tears (p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: In this study, patients' preoperative functional scores and activity levels were low. Patients with lateral meniscal root tears were more likely to have an ACL tear. Patients with medial meniscal root tears were more likely to have an knee articular cartilage defect with an Outerbridge grade 2 or higher chondral defect. This study confirms the importance of comprehensive assessment of concurrent injuries to properly diagnose meniscus root tears. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.