Editorial Commentary: In Cases of Concurrent Triangular Fibrocartilage Complex Tears and Ulnar Styloid Process Fracture Nonunions, We May Neither Need to Excise nor Repair the Ulnar Styloid Fracture Nonunion Fragment.

The ulnar-sided wrist contains multiple potential pain generators that may present in isolation. Occasionally, however, wrist trauma results in multiple concurrent and overlapping injuries that make diagnosis and treatment of these conditions challenging. Deep/foveal tears of the triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC) may occur in the setting of nonunited ulnar styloid process fractures. Treatment of these injuries has historically included open TFCC repair with fixation or excision of the ulnar styloid fracture nonunion fragment; however, recent literature suggests that addressing the ulnar styloid nonunion fragment may not be as important as we think. Recent research shows that we may not need to excise or repair the ulnar styloid fracture nonunion fragment, which in turn may help preserve the complex ligamentous architecture that stabilizes the ulnar-sided wrist. One thing we know for sure is that foveal tears of the deep fibers of the TFCC, with or without ulnar styloid fracture (Palmer 1B, Atzei class 2 or 3), can produce distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) instability and wrist dysfunction and should be addressed sooner rather than later to prevent long-term consequences, including DRUJ osteoarthritis. Whether you choose to approach the problem arthroscopically or open, the foveal TFCC tear should be repaired to prevent long-term sequalae.

Evaluation of Mid-term Outcomes Following Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty for Avascular Necrosis of the Humeral Head in Patients 40 Years and Younger.

In order to evaluate postoperative function and failure rates among younger patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty for humeral head avascular necrosis (AVN), data from patients < 40 years treated between December 2008 - January 2018 was retrospectively analyzed. Pain was assessed preoperatively and at final follow up using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) standardized assessment, single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE) score, and patient satisfaction were assessed at final follow up, as well as surgical revision rates. In total, eight shoulders were included in the final analysis, with a follow up of 6.6 + 3.6 years. Analysis indicated a statistical improvement in VAS pain (p = 0.001), while comparison of postoperative function between surgical and non-surgical limbs did not demonstrate statistical differences in SANE or ASES averages (p > 0.05). At final follow up, 25% of patients expressed dissatisfaction; however, there were no cases of revision surgery. In conclusion, younger patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty for humeral head AVN experienced pain improvement and no revisions at short-to-mid-term follow up, but one-in-four indicated dissatisfaction. Level of evidence: IV, case series. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 32(2):118-121, 2023).

Distal Radius Fractures and Bone Health: A Survey of Hand Surgeons.

Following low-energy distal radius fractures (DRF) patients rarely receive a bone health evaluation. The purpose of this survey was to investigate the attitudes and practices of American Society for Surgery of the Hand (ASSH) members regarding osteoporosis and low-energy DRF. An electronic survey was sent to 4,125 members of the ASSH. Physicians were asked about referral patterns, comfort level with labs and imaging related to bone health, and barriers. There were 475 responses (response rate 11.5%). Most respondents always (33.1%) or often (32.8%) talk about osteoporosis risk after low-energy DRF. Most respondents (87.6%) do not routinely order metabolic labs. Less than half knew of an available Fracture Liaison Service. Barriers to discussion included not enough time (32.6%), not comfortable with the topic (12.6%), and not within practice scope (33.3%). Respondents reported variable comfort levels discussing and implementing osteoporosis care in the setting of low-energy DRF. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 31(3):155-160, 2022).

Analgesic Benefit of Pectoral Nerve Block II Blockade for Open Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis: A Randomized, Prospective, Double-Blinded, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Axillary pain is common after arthroscopic shoulder surgery with an open subpectoral biceps tenodesis. We hypothesized that adding a pectoral nerve block II (Pecs II) to an interscalene block (ISB) would improve postoperative analgesia in this surgical population. METHODS: Forty patients were enrolled in this prospective, randomized, observer and patient-blinded, single-institution trial. All 40 patients received a single-injection ISB with 20 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine with 1:400,000 epinephrine and 1:600,000 clonidine. The intervention arm (ISB + Pecs II) consisted of 20 patients who also received a Pecs II block using 30 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine with 1:400,000 epinephrine and 1:600,000 clonidine. The 20 control group patients (ISB) received a sham Pecs II block. The primary outcome was postoperative pain scores at 6 hours using the numeric rating scale (NRS; range, 0-10) and was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Secondary outcomes included the presence of axillary pain at 6 hours, the need for postanesthesia care unit (PACU) opioids, PACU length of stay (LOS) (minutes), NRS pain scores at 24 hours, cumulative opioid usage postdischarge through 24 hours, the presence of nausea or vomiting during the first 24 hours, and Pecs II block duration (in hours, based on time to onset of axillary pain). Data were analyzed using a modified intention-to-treat (ITT) methodology. RESULTS: Pain scores (NRS, 0-10) at 6 hours differed significantly between groups: ISB 3.0 (0.25-5.0) (1.7-4.3) versus ISB + Pecs II 0.0 (0-2.0) (0.0-1.1) (median [IQR] [95% CI]); P = .026. Hodges-Lehmann estimator of the difference was 2.0 (95% CI, 0.0-4.0). Fewer patients in the ISB + Pecs II group reported axillary pain at 6 hours and fewer required opioids in the PACU. There were no differences in any of the remaining secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a Pecs II block to an ISB for patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery with an open subpectoral biceps tenodesis significantly improved postoperative analgesia and reduced the need for opioids in the PACU.

Editorial Commentary: Arthroscopic Triangular Fibrocartilage Complex Debridement May or May Not Help With Ulnar-Sided Wrist Pain.

After ruling out additional potential pain generators for ulnar-sided wrist pain, arthroscopic debridement for triangular fibrocartilage complex pathology can be an effective means for decreasing pain and improving function in the short term. Arthroscopic skills aside, this procedure will not work for all comers, and establishing realistic patient expectations is essential for optimal outcomes.

Peripheral Nerve Injury After Elbow Arthroscopy: An Analysis of Risk Factors.

PURPOSE: To identify risk factors associated with peripheral nerve injury after elbow arthroscopy and provide an updated incidence of those complications. METHODS: The elbow arthroscopies that were performed at our institution between 2006 and 2016 were identified. Over a 10-year period, 253 elbow arthroscopies were performed at our institution. Two hundred twenty-seven cases had a minimum follow-up of 4 weeks, and were included in our analysis. Minor and major nerve-related complications were recorded. The surgeon's experience and training, body max index of the patients, surgical tourniquet time, type of anesthesia or surgery, radiographic appearance of the elbow, diagnosis at the time of surgery, and presence of diabetes were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 12 reported peripheral nerve injuries, 10 minor (4.4%) and 2 major complications (0.9%). The risk factors examined in this study were not correlated with a higher rate of complications. CONCLUSIONS: The minor nerve-related complication rate was 4.4%, with a 0.9% incidence of major peripheral nerve injury. Based on these findings, we conclude that elbow arthroscopy is a relatively safe procedure. The risk factors examined in this study had no association with the rate of complications. This finding could be potentially related to type II or beta error in the analysis of risk factors for nerve injury. The exact reasons for nerve injury are not known from this study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective case series.

Disseminated Cryptococcal Osteomyelitis to the Hand in an Immunosuppressed Lymphoma Patient.

Fungal osteomyelitis of the hand is rare with limited evidence-based literature to guide diagnosis and management. We report a case of disseminated cryptococcal osteomyelitis in the middle phalanx from a pulmonary fungal infection in a patient with a history of lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma. Although rare, cryptococcosis should be considered in the differential diagnosis of aggressive lytic lesions with bone pain and associated large soft tissue masses, especially in the immunosuppressed host.

The examination and treatment of soft tissue contracture of the elbow.

Treatment of the stiff elbow can be a challenging task. A thorough understanding of normal elbow anatomy and the potential causes of elbow contracture are essential for the development of effective treatment strategies. This chapter provides a review of key points for the treating surgeon including normal elbow anatomy, etiological factors that commonly contribute to elbow stiffness, physical examination and imaging of the stiff elbow, and treatment options for contracture correction.

A Case of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Resulting from Interference Screw Malposition after LRTI.

Many approaches to CMC arthroplasty have been described for treatment of advanced arthritis, yet there is no consensus on the "best" operation. Implantable hardware is increasingly utilized for metacarpal suspension, but few hardware-mediated complications have been documented. Here we present the case of a 69-year-old man with insidious-onset median neuropathy following ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition for CMC arthritis, utilizing interference screw fixation. After surgery, the patient developed median neuropathy, and his physical examination and MRI demonstrated a mass in the volar wrist. Operative exploration revealed an interference screw that was lodged immediately volar to the transverse carpal ligament, causing median nerve compression. Median neurolysis and screw removal led to symptom resolution. Carpal tunnel syndrome is an unreported complication of interference screw use during thumb CMC arthroplasty, and should be considered in patients with postoperative median neuropathy following ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition.

Patients undergoing surgical treatment for low-energy distal radius fractures are more likely to receive a referral and participate in a fracture liaison service program.

INTRODUCTION: Patients often do not receive osteoporosis screening after a low-energy distal radius fracture (DRF). The effect of osteoporosis on the healing of DRFs remains a debate, and it is unclear if surgical treatment of this injury affects the referral and participation rates in a fracture liaison service (FLS) program. The purpose of this study is to report on a large cohort of low-energy DRFs and identify demographic, clinical, and treatment factors that affect referral and participation rates in an FLS program. METHODS: A retrospective review identified patients over 50 years old who sustained a low-energy DRF between 2013 and 2018. Patients with high-energy or unknown injury mechanisms were excluded. The primary outcome was the effect of DRF surgical treatment on referral and participation rates in an FLS program. Secondary outcomes included patient demographic and clinical characteristic effects on referral and participation rates in an FLS program. RESULTS: In total, 950 patients met inclusion criteria. Two hundred thirty patients (24.2%) were referred and 149 (15.7%) participated in the FLS program. Patients who underwent surgery were more likely to be referred to the FLS (OR 1.893, CI 1.403-2.555, p < 0.001) and participate in the FLS program (OR 2.47, CI 1.723-3.542, p < 0.001) compared to patients who received non-operative treatment of their DRF. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo surgical treatment of a low-energy DRF are more likely to be referred and participate in a FLS program. Further study is needed to identify why surgical treatment may affect referral and participation rates.

Treatment of elbow instability: state of the art.

The elbow is a congruent joint with a high degree of inherent stability, provided by osseous and soft-tissue constraints; however, when substantial lesions of these stabilising structures happen, instability of the elbow occurs. Significant improvements in surgical elbow instability diagnosis and treatment have been recently introduced both for acute and chronic cases. Specific stress tests, recently introduced in the clinical practice, and different imaging techniques, both static and dynamic, allow assessment of the elbow stabilisers and detection of the instability direction and mechanism even in subtle forms. Many surgical techniques have been standardised and surgical instruments and devices, specifically dedicated to elbow instability treatment, have been developed. Specific rehabilitation protocols have been designed to protect the healing of the elbow stabilisers while minimising elbow stiffness. However, despite the progress, surgical treatments can be challenging even for expert surgeons and the rate of persistent instability, post-traumatic arthritis, stiffness and pain can be still high especially in most demanding cases. The biology of the soft-tissue healing remains one of the most important aspects for future investigation. If future research will help to understand, correct or modulate the biological response of soft-tissue healing, our confidence in elbow instability management and the reproducibility of our treatment will tremendously improve. In this paper, the state of the art of the current knowledge of elbow instability is presented, specifically focusing on modern surgical techniques used to solve instability, with repair or reconstruction of the damaged elbow stabilisers.

Early to midterm radiographic loosening of the press fit radial head prosthesis.

BACKGROUND: Radiographic loosening is frequently seen around the radial head (RH) implant. The hypothesis of this study was that radiographic loosening will be more frequent in patients in which the RH prosthesis was implanted due to elbow trauma leading to instability that required lateral collateral ligament repair (LCL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of the patients who had RH implantation between 2012 and 2019 was performed. Evaluation included evidence of radiographic loosening, stress shielding, formation of heterotopic ossification, and rate of removal of the implant. Range of motion of the elbow at the latest follow up was also recorded. RESULTS: At a mean follow up of 18 months (range 1.4 - 80) eight out of 25 patients had radiographic loosening around the implant. The radial head implant was removed in 8 patients (in 3 due to painful radiographic loosening, in 4 due pain without radiographic loosening and in 1 due to infection). Radiographic loosening around the RH implant had no association with LCL repair (p=0.18) or future removal of implant (p=0.18) or the diagnosis of Monteggia lesion (p=0.68). In addition, removal of the RH implant had no association with prior LCL repair (p=0.60) or the diagnosis of Monteggia lesion (p=0.15). Stress shielding was seen in 5 patients and was of no clinical significance. Heterotopic ossification was seen in 12 patients and was classified as Class I in 3, IIA in 3, IIC in 6, according to the Hastings Classification. The average flexion-extension arc was 23° to 130°, and average pronation-supination was 76° to 69°. CONCLUSION: One third of the patients had radiographic loosening around the RH implant at a mean follow up of 18 months. Pain with or without radiographic loosening were the main reasons for removal of the implant. No associations were found between the development of radiographic loosening and LCL repair at the time of RH replacement. Limitations of this study are: (a) the retrospective design (b). the small sample size and the possibility of a type II statistical error.

Clinical Outcomes of Superior Capsular Reconstruction for Massive, Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears: A Systematic Review Comparing Acellular Dermal Allograft and Autograft Fascia Lata.

PURPOSE: To investigate clinical outcomes after superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) for the treatment of massive and/or irreparable rotator cuff tears treated with either allograft or autograft. METHODS: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, in April 2020 a systematic review was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Clinical studies were assessed for patient-reported outcomes and range of motion, comparing dermal allografts to fascia lata autografts, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 16 clinical studies involving 598 patients (606 shoulders) were included for data analysis, with a weighted mean follow-up of 36.9 months (range 12 to 60). Visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores decreased from 4.0 to 6.9 mm preoperatively to 0 to 2.5 mm postoperatively. American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeons score increased from 20.3 to 54.5 preoperatively to 73.7 to 97.0 postoperatively. Forward flexion increased from 27.0° to 142.7° preoperatively to 134.5° to 167.0° postoperatively. External rotation increased from 13.2° to 41.0° preoperatively to 30.0° to 59.0° postoperatively. Acromiohumeral distance increased from 3.4 to 7.1 mm preoperatively to 6.0 to 9.7 mm postoperatively. The total rates of complications, graft failure, and revision surgery were 5.6%, 13.9%, and 6.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Irrespective of tissue source, SCR serves as a reasonable joint-preserving option for massive, irreparable rotator cuff tears, with favorable short- to midterm improvements in patient-reported outcomes and range of motion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, systematic review of level III and IV studies.

Needle Length Requirement for Glenohumeral Joint Injection Using the Neviaser Approach.

Intra-articular glenohumeral joint injections are commonly performed in the clinical setting for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. Multiple approaches are described, including the anterior and posterior approaches and the less studied superomedial (Neviaser) approach. The purpose of this study was to determine the length of needle required to enter the shoulder joint via the Neviaser approach by radiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurements. Additionally, the authors sought to identify any correlation between needle length and body mass index (BMI). They performed a retrospective review of 101 consecutive patients evaluated by one faculty member at their institution. Inclusion criteria were age older than 50 years, no previous shoulder surgery, no history of acromioclavicular joint injury, and having a true anteroposterior radiograph and MRI within 1 year of each other. Using a digital imaging system, the Neviaser approach needle path was drawn for both images, and the lengths were measured. Correlation coefficients for needle length and BMI were calculated. The images of 58 (57.4%) male patients and 43 (42.6%) female patients were evaluated (average BMI, 31.2 kg/m2). The average needle length measurement was 4.27 cm on radiograph and 3.9 cm on MRI. Correlation coefficients were r=0.36 (P=.0002) using radiographs and r=0.53 (P<.0001) using MRIs. When using the Neviaser approach, there is a moderate positive correlation between BMI and the measured distance between skin and the glenohumeral joint when assessed on MRI, and a weak positive correlation on radiographs. The authors conclude that an injection needle of 2 inches or greater is required to reliably access the shoulder joint, and this length may increase with increasing BMI. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(4):e215-e218.].

The financial burden associated with multiple shoulder dislocations and the potential cost savings of surgical stabilization.

INTRODUCTION: Shoulder dislocation is a costly problem and can have a high risk for recurrent instability after initial dislocation based on well-defined patient characteristics. Patients with recurrent instability can be treated with shoulder stabilizing procedures. Although more costly, surgery may decrease the overall health care burden of managing a patient with multiple shoulder dislocations nonoperatively. METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) with a diagnosis of a shoulder dislocation at a level 1 academic trauma center during the year 2016. Patient information regarding the current dislocation episode, previous dislocations, shoulder surgeries, and postreduction follow-up was gathered. These data were then used to determine the average cost of an ED presentation for a shoulder dislocation episode as obtained from the hospital finance department. The average cost of shoulder stabilization surgery was used to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of operative vs. nonoperative management. RESULTS: Data were collected on 104 individuals who presented to the ED with shoulder dislocations. Of these, 65 were primary dislocations and 39 were recurrent dislocations. Twelve patients underwent shoulder stabilization surgery after their ED presentation. The average cost to the institution for an ED visit requiring the closed reduction of a shoulder dislocation was $2207 ($973.21 without sedation and $3744 with conscious sedation). The average cost of a shoulder stabilization procedure performed at this same institution was $7807. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Although shoulder stabilization has a higher cost on the front end, this intervention results in cost savings if it prevents 2-3 future shoulder dislocations resulting in ED visits. These findings suggest that, for patients with a high risk for recurrent instability, not only would stabilization surgery help prevent subsequent dislocation events but would also minimize health care costs.

Outcomes of Subacromial Balloon Spacer Implantation for Massive and Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Selection of optimal treatment for massive to irreparable rotator cuff tears (RCTs) entails a challenging decision-making process in which surgeons must consider several factors, including duration of symptoms, tear pattern, tear size, and muscle quality, as well as patient characteristics such as age, comorbidities, shoulder dominance, and activity level. Unfortunately, no clear consensus has been reached regarding optimal management. PURPOSE: To systematically review the published literature assessing outcomes after subacromial balloon spacer implantation for treatment of massive and irreparable RCTs. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed in September 2018 through use of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library electronic databases. Studies were assessed for multiple outcomes of interest including Constant score, Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder Score, complications, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: After applying the selection criteria, 12 clinical studies were included for data extraction and analysis. In total, 291 shoulders (in 284 patients) treated with subacromial balloon spacer implantation were pooled for evaluation, with a mean follow-up of 22.9 ± 14.9 months (range, 6-60 months). Constant scores were used as an outcome metric for 267 shoulders (91.7%; 11 studies), with improvements in mean Constant score ranging from 18.5 to 49.6 points. Patient satisfaction was assessed in 105 patients (37.0%; 5 studies), with rates of patients indicating they were satisfied or very satisfied with their treatment outcome ranging from 45.8% to 100%. A total of 6 patients (2.1%) experienced complications related to balloon spacer implantation, including transient neurapraxia of the lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve, superficial wound infection, deep wound infection, and balloon migration. Of these, 3 patients (2 balloon migration, 1 deep wound infection) required subsequent surgeries for balloon removal. CONCLUSION: Placement of the subacromial balloon spacer is a minimally invasive, technically simple procedure with favorable patient-reported outcomes at limited short-term follow-up. However, inherent methodological limitations and patient heterogeneity between studies may impair our ability to fully characterize the longer term efficacy, particularly relative to other potential surgical options. Further prospective randomized or comparative studies are warranted to ascertain clinical outcomes of subacromial balloon spacer in the management of massive and irreparable RCTs.

How well do anatomical reconstructions of the posterolateral corner restore varus stability to the posterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knee?

BACKGROUND: With grade 3 posterolateral injuries of the knee, reconstructions of the lateral collateral ligament, popliteus tendon, and popliteofibular ligament are commonly performed in conjunction with a posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction to restore knee stability. HYPOTHESIS: A lateral collateral ligament reconstruction, alone or with a popliteus tendon or popliteofibular ligament reconstruction, will produce normal varus rotation patterns and restore posterior cruciate ligament graft forces to normal levels in response to an applied varus moment. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Forces in the native posterior cruciate ligament were recorded for 15 intact knees during passive extension from 120 degrees to 0 degrees with an applied 5 N .m varus moment. The posterior cruciate ligament was removed and reconstructed with a single bundle inlay graft tensioned to restore intact knee laxity at 90 degrees . Posterior cruciate ligament graft force, varus rotation, and tibial rotation were recorded before and after a grade 3 posterolateral corner injury. Testing was repeated with lateral collateral ligament, lateral collateral ligament plus popliteus tendon, and lateral collateral ligament plus popliteofibular ligament graft reconstructions; all grafts were tensioned to 30 N at 30 degrees with the tibia locked in neutral rotation. RESULTS: All 3 posterolateral graft combinations rotated the tibia into slight valgus as the knee was taken through a passive range of motion. During the varus test, popliteus tendon and popliteofibular ligament reconstructions internally rotated the tibia from 1.5 degrees (0 degrees flexion) to approximately 12 degrees (45 degrees flexion). With an applied varus moment, mean varus rotations with a lateral collateral ligament graft were significantly less than those with the intact lateral collateral ligament beyond 0 degrees flexion; mean decreases ranged from 0.8 degrees (at 5 degrees flexion) to 5.6 degrees (at 120 degrees flexion). Addition of a popliteus tendon or popliteofibular ligament graft further reduced varus rotation (compared with a lateral collateral ligament graft) beyond 25 degrees of flexion; both grafts had equal effects. A lateral collateral ligament reconstruction alone restored posterior cruciate ligament graft forces to normal levels between 0 degrees and 100 degrees of flexion; lateral collateral ligament plus popliteus tendon and lateral collateral ligament plus popliteofibular ligament reconstructions reduced posterior cruciate ligament graft forces to below-normal levels-beyond 95 degrees and 85 degrees of flexion, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With a grade 3 posterolateral corner injury, popliteus tendon or popliteofibular ligament reconstructions are commonly performed to limit external tibial rotation; we found that they also limited varus rotation. With the graft tensioning protocols used in this study, all posterolateral graft combinations tested overconstrained varus rotation. Further studies with posterolateral reconstructions are required to better restore normal kinematics and provide more optimum load sharing between the PCL graft and posterolateral grafts. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A lower level of posterolateral graft tension, perhaps applied at a different flexion angle, may be indicated to better restore normal varus stability. The clinical implications of overconstraining varus rotation are unknown.

Popliteus bypass and popliteofibular ligament reconstructions reduce posterior tibial translations and forces in a posterior cruciate ligament graft.

PURPOSE: To measure the abilities of popliteus tendon (POP) and popliteofibular ligament (PFL) graft reconstructions to limit posterior tibial translations and alter forces in a PCL graft reconstruction after posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) and lateral collateral ligament (LCL) reconstruction. METHODS: Fifteen fresh frozen cadaveric knees underwent anterior-posterior (AP) laxity testing with 200 N of applied anterior and posterior tibial force. Forces in the native PCL were recorded during passive extension from 120 degrees to 0 degrees with an applied 100-N posterior tibial force. The popliteus tendon was released at its femoral origin, the PFL and LCL were cut, and the PCL was sectioned, creating a combined grade 3 PCL and posterolateral corner injury. The PCL was reconstructed with a single-bundle inlay graft tensioned to restore intact knee laxity to within 1 mm at 90 degrees , and the LCL was reconstructed with an anatomically placed graft. Testing was repeated with POP and PFL posterolateral reconstructions in addition to the PCL and LCL reconstructions. RESULTS: PCL + LCL grafts alone matched intact knee laxities between 20 degrees and 90 degrees of flexion; mean laxity was 3.5 mm greater than intact at 0 degrees and 2.2 mm greater at 10 degrees. The addition of a POP reconstruction to PCL + LCL reconstructions significantly reduced AP laxities from -2.4 mm (0 degrees flexion) to -1.4 mm (90 degrees flexion). Mean laxities with POP and PFL grafts were not significantly different from the intact knee or from each other. Mean PCL graft forces with the PCL + LCL reconstructions alone were not significantly different than those with the native PCL. Mean PCL graft forces with POP and PFL reconstructions were not significantly different from each other; both means were significantly less than those for the PCL + LCL reconstructions alone at flexion angles greater than 55 degrees. CONCLUSIONS: After PCL and LCL reconstruction, the popliteus bypass and popliteofibular ligament reconstructions not only eliminated excessive posterior laxity and returned the knee to a normal laxity profile but also resulted in substantial decreases in PCL graft forces. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These results provide further rationale for reconstructing torn posterolateral structures with a grade 3 posterolateral injury in combination with a PCL reconstruction.