Follow-up Treatment after Cartilage Therapy of the Knee Joint - a Recommendation of the DGOU Clinical Tissue Regeneration Working Group. / Nachbehandlung nach Knorpeltherapie am Kniegelenk ­ eine Empfehlung der AG Klinische Geweberegeneration der DGOU.

The first follow-up treatment recommendation from the DGOU's Clinical Tissue Regeneration working group dates back to 2012. New scientific evidence and changed framework conditions made it necessary to update the follow-up treatment recommendations after cartilage therapy.As part of a multi-stage member survey, a consensus was reached which, together with the scientific evidence, provides the basis for the present follow-up treatment recommendation.The decisive criterion for follow-up treatment is still the defect localisation. A distinction is made between femorotibial and patellofemoral defects. In addition, further criteria regarding cartilage defects are now also taken into account (stable cartilage edge, location outside the main stress zone) and the different methods of cartilage therapy (e. g. osteochondral transplantation, minced cartilage) are discussed.The present updated recommendation includes different aspects of follow-up treatment, starting with early perioperative management through to sports clearance and resumption of contact sports after cartilage therapy has taken place.

Primary surgery versus primary rehabilitation for treating anterior cruciate ligament injuries: a living systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Compare the effectiveness of primarily surgical versus primarily rehabilitative management for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture. DESIGN: Living systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Six databases, six trial registries and prior systematic reviews. Forward and backward citation tracking was employed. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials that compared primary reconstructive surgery and primary rehabilitative treatment with or without optional reconstructive surgery. DATA SYNTHESIS: Bayesian random effects meta-analysis with empirical priors for the OR and standardised mean difference and 95% credible intervals (CrI), Cochrane RoB2, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to judge the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Of 9514 records, 9 reports of three studies (320 participants in total) were included. No clinically important differences were observed at any follow-up for self-reported knee function (low to very low certainty of evidence). For radiological knee osteoarthritis, we found no effect at very low certainty of evidence in the long term (OR (95% CrI): 1.45 (0.30 to 5.17), two studies). Meniscal damage showed no effect at low certainty of evidence (OR: 0.85 (95% CI 0.45 to 1.62); one study) in the long term. No differences were observed between treatments for any other secondary outcome. Three ongoing randomised controlled trials were identified. CONCLUSIONS: There is low to very low certainty of evidence that primary rehabilitation with optional surgical reconstruction results in similar outcome measures as early surgical reconstruction for ACL rupture. The findings challenge a historical paradigm that anatomic instability should be addressed with primary surgical stabilisation to provide optimal outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021256537.

Author Response to "Concerns About the Methodology and Data Collection in a Systematic Review".

Author response to the JOSPT Letter to the Editor-in-Chief "Concerns About the Methodology and Data Collection in a Systematic Review". J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(1):50-51. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.0201-R.

[Judging movement quality in patients who sustained a knee ligament injury: a systematic review]. / Tests zur Beurteilung der Bewegungsqualität nach ligamentären Verletzungen des Kniegelenks: eine systematische Übersichtsarbeit.

BACKGROUND: Knee joint injury statistics are dominated by ruptures of the capsular ligament structures. Post-traumatic deficits in dynamic movement patterns are assessed quantitatively as well as qualitatively. The aim of this review was to compile tools that are used to assess the quality of movement after knee ligament injuries in adults. METHODS: A systematic search for original papers was carried out in the following primary sources: Ovid, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science. Both conservative and surgical treatment options were considered. PROSPERO registration of the study protocol: CRD42020175359. RESULTS: A total of 1153 papers were identified. Eleven original papers from four different working groups were included in this work. All papers assessed the quality of movement in adults after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. A total of 348 (70 deficient, 278 reconstructed) patients after an ACL injury and 119 adults with an intact ACL were examined in the studies included. CONCLUSION: It is possible to assess movement quality after a knee ligament injury with a low temporal and technical effort. The changes recorded result in a functional valgus, which, based on the study results, may be further differentiated into isolated knee valgus, medial collapse or postural collapse.

[Consequences of anterior cruciate ligament rupture: a systematic umbrella review]. / Folgen einer vorderen Kreuzbandruptur ­ Ein systematisches Umbrella-Review.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of an anterior cruciate ligament rupture is still controversial. In particular, this applies to the question of conservative versus surgical treatment. The answer to this question is often based on consequential damage such as the development of posttraumatic osteoarthritis, secondary damage to the meniscus or cartilage, and participation in sports. If there are significant differences in these parameters between the individual treatment options, the results will be of great importance for the development of evidence-based treatment pathways. Therefore, the aim of this work was to evaluate the development of knee osteoarthritis after rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament and the corresponding treatment (conservative or surgical). MATERIAL AND METHODS: To answer the above question, a systematic literature search was conducted in Medline via Pubmed, the Cochrane Library and in CINAHL. Only systematic reviews with a minimum follow-up period of 10 years were included. The search was conducted in January 2020 and updated in January 2021. Investigated cohorts included patients with a rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament who had undergone either conservative or surgical treatment. Osteoarthritis was diagnosed either radiologically (recognized scores) or clinically (pain and impaired function). Appropriate reviews were qualitatively evaluated using the AMSTAR-2 questionnaire. RESULTS: The literature research initially identified n = 42 reviews from which 14 reviews were included. After full-text review and qualitative evaluation, only n = 2 systematic reviews remained for evaluation. The results of both papers show imprecise data with a high variability. However, it can be assumed with high probability that the development of osteoarthritis of the knee is increased after a rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament. There is no evidence that the incidence of joint degeneration may be reduced by reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament, nor is there a difference when comparing conservative and surgical treatment directly. CONCLUSION: Patients with an anterior cruciate ligament rupture are likely to be at a greater risk of developing progressive joint degeneration. A protective effect of cruciate ligament surgery has not been found in the evaluated studies. A general argument in favour of cruciate ligament surgery aiming to achieve a protective effect on hyaline articular cartilage seems obsolete based on the results and should therefore not be used in patient education in the future.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Clusters of Pain Provocation Tests for Detecting Sacroiliac Joint Pain: Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic test accuracy of pain provocation tests for the sacroiliac joint. DESIGN: Systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy. LITERATURE SEARCH: Seven electronic databases and reference lists of included studies and previous reviews were searched. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies investigating the diagnostic accuracy of clusters of clinical tests for sacroiliac joint pain were included. DATA SYNTHESIS: Bivariate random-effects meta-analysis was employed. Risk of bias and applicability concerns were assessed using the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to judge credibility of evidence. RESULTS: From 2195 records identified in the search, 5 studies were included that assessed clusters of pain provocation tests for the sacroiliac joint. The estimated positive likelihood ratio was 2.13 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2, 3.9), the negative likelihood ratio was 0.33 (95% CI: 0.11, 0.72), and the diagnostic odds ratio was 9.01 (95% CI: 1.72, 28.4). The GRADE ratings for the outcomes were of very low certainty. Assuming a point prevalence of sacroiliac joint pain of 20%, we calculated a positive posterior probability of 35% (95% CI: 32%, 37%) and negative posterior probability of 8% (95% CI: 6%, 10%). CONCLUSION: A positive result on a sacroiliac joint pain provocation test cluster gives the clinician 35% certainty of having correctly identified sacroiliac joint pain. Clusters of pain provocation tests for the sacroiliac joint do not provide sufficient diagnostic accuracy for ruling in the sacroiliac joint as the source of pain. Clinicians can rule out the sacroiliac joint as the source of pain with more confidence: the negative posttest probability indicates that the clinician can conclude with 92% certainty that a negative test result is correct. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(9):422-431. Epub 1 Jul 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10469.