Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was developed to ascertain the smallest change in an outcome that patients perceive as beneficial. The objectives of the present review were (1) to compare the MCIDs for pain assessments used among guidelines and meta-analyses investigating different nonsurgical therapies for knee osteoarthritis and (2) to compare the effect estimates of different nonsurgical interventions against a single commonly-utilized MCID threshold. METHODS:Systematic and manual searches were conducted to identify guidelines and meta-analyses evaluating pain outcomes for nonsurgical knee osteoarthritis interventions. Individual treatment effects for pain were presented on a common scale (the standardized mean difference [SMD]). To evaluate the perception of the relative benefit of each nonsurgical treatment, the variation in MCIDs selected from the published MCID literature was assessed. RESULTS:Thirty-seven guidelines and meta-analyses were included. MCIDs were often presented as an SMD or a mean difference (MD) on a validated scale and varied in magnitude across sources. This analysis demonstrated that intra-articular hyaluronic acid, intra-articular corticosteroids, and acetaminophen all had relatively larger effect sizes than topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Higher-molecular-weight intra-articular hyaluronic acid had a greater relative effect compared with both non-selective and cyclooxygenase-2-selective oral NSAIDs. Evaluating the treatment effect estimates against a commonly utilized MCID revealed similarities in which observations attained clinical significance among treatments; however, this observation varied across the range of reported MCIDs. CONCLUSIONS:The present review confirmed the variability in the MCIDs for pain assessments that are used across guidelines and meta-analyses evaluating nonsurgical interventions for knee osteoarthritis. This variability may yield conflicting treatment recommendations, ranging from rejecting treatments that are indeed efficacious to accepting treatments that may not be beneficial. Additional research is required to determine why some nonsurgical therapies are more consistently recommended in knee osteoarthritis guidelines than others as these findings suggest similarities in their effect estimates for pain. Relevant stakeholders need to reach a consensus on a standard approach to determining the MCIDs for these therapies to ensure that appropriate and effective treatment options are available to patients prior to invasive surgical intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction is a reliable surgical method for stabilizing a dislocating patella, with multiple techniques previously described. Although outcomes are generally favorable, the procedure is technically demanding and relies on precise identification of native MPFL insertion sites, secure fixation of the graft to these sites, and appropriate graft tension. We describe a technique for MPFL reconstruction with a looped semitendinosus tendon. The 2 free limbs of the graft are secured into blind-end patellar sockets with knotless anchors, and the looped end is initially secured into a medial femoral socket with a button on the opposite (lateral) cortex. Use of an adjustable-loop button allows for gradual adjustment of graft tension, as well as re-tensioning after cycling of the knee, before final aperture fixation on the femur with an interference screw.

Background: Allografts offer potential advantages over autografts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), including the absence of donor site morbidity, shorter operative times, improved cosmesis, and easier rehabilitation. There is limited and conflicting outcome data for ACLR with tibialis anterior allograft. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the functional outcomes of ACLR with tibialis anterior allograft. Methods:We retrospectively evaluated primary ACL reconstructions using tibialis anterior allograft between January 2004 and December 2006. Clinical outcomes were measured by KT-1000 arthrometry, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Lysholm, and Tegner scores. Results: 19 patients were available for follow-up at a mean of 2.7 years (range: 2.0 to 3.2). One patient experienced a traumatic re-rupture that required revision and another patient was advised to undergo revision reconstruction for a failed graft. Based on IKDC and Lysholm scoring, 12 patients (63%) had good or excellent results, 4 (21%) patients had fair results, and 3 (16%) patients had poor results. The mean side-to-side difference was 2.7mm (0 to 8.2) and the mean decrease in Tegner activity level was 1.4 (0 to 6). Conclusion:An alarming number of patients demonstrated residual laxity after ACL reconstruction with tibialis anterior allograft. We recommend against using tibialis anterior allograft as a first choice graft for high demand patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety of repeated intra-articular (IA) injections of Euflexxa(R) (1% sodium hyaluronate; IA--BioHA) for painful knee osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: Participants who completed the randomized, double-blind, 26-week FLEXX Trial comparing IA-BioHA to IA saline (IA-SA) for knee OA(1) received three weekly IA-BioHA injections in a 26-week Extension Study. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded and the effect of treatment on knee pain was measured immediately following a 50-foot walk test using a 100 mm visual analog scale (VAS). Responder rate, Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 scores, Patient's Global Assessment, and intake of rescue medication were also evaluated. RESULTS: The Extension Study included 433 subjects, 219 who received IA-BioHA and 214 who received IA-SA during the FLEXX Trial. Safety results from the Extension Study indicated that 43.4% (188/433) of subjects had AEs, of which 4.8% (21/433) were deemed treatment-related AEs. Two AEs in the Extension Study led to discontinuation, and no joint effusion was reported. Patients who continued with IA-BioHA in the Extension Study maintained their improvement from baseline, with an average reduction in pain in the VAS score of -3.5 mm. Patients initially treated with IA-SA in the FLEXX Trial also had a reduction in VAS score of -9.0 mm. Secondary efficacy variables also improved during the Extension Study. CONCLUSIONS: Repeat injections of IA-BioHA were effective, safe, well tolerated, and not associated with an increase in AEs, such as synovial effusions. Additional symptom improvements were noted for subjects who received either IA-BioHA or IA-SA in the FLEXX Trial. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT00379236

Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and meniscal injuries are common in both athletes and the general population. Such injuries may lead to early-onset post-traumatic osteoarthritis (OA) in 50% to 60% of patients, regardless of whether patients had reconstruction performed. In younger patients, intra-articular (IA) injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) may be useful for improving short-term outcomes and possibly slowing or arresting the progression of OA. Hyaluronic acid has anti-inflammatory, anabolic, and chondroprotective effects, which have been demonstrated in in vitro and animal models of meniscal and ACL injury. Results from several clinical trials and patient series have demonstrated the benefit of IA HA injection in younger patients with acute knee damage, including symptomatic meniscal tears and isolated ACL injury with chondral injury, although evidence for this is less extensive than the large database supporting the use of IA HA injection in older patients with knee OA. Administration of HA has been shown to improve outcomes in patients undergoing knee arthroscopy, and IA HA also has direct antinociceptive effects that may contribute to its benefit in patients with patellofemoral pain. However, the use of IA HA in patients with ACL injury or early OA has been evaluated in only a few studies. Thus, there is a need for larger-scale randomized controlled trials with longer durations of follow-up to provide more definitive evaluation of the efficacy and safety of IA HA in these patients. Such studies provide an opportunity to further elucidate the benefits of IA HA in younger patients with knee damage and may result in appropriate expansion of use in this large population, which has a substantial need for new treatment alternatives

BACKGROUND: There has been an increasing number of arthroscopic surgeries performed in general orthopedic surgery practice, as well as a rapid evolution of arthroscopic techniques. The objective of this investigation was to assess the adequacy of arthroscopic training in U.S. orthopedic residency programs from a resident and program director perspective. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed with a mail-in survey to orthopaedic surgery residents and program directors. Out of 151 programs contacted, we received responses from 24 program directors (15.9%) and 272 residents (11.1% of 2447 possible residents in years 2 through 5 in 2006). Program demographics and resident and program director assessments of arthroscopic surgical training was obtained from the questionnaire. Assessment of open surgical techniques was used as a control. The responses from fifth-year residents (83 of a possible 612 in 2006 (13.6%)) and program directors were used for detailed analysis. RESULTS: Only 32% (27/83) of fifth-year residents felt there was adequate time dedicated to arthroscopic training, compared to 66% (16/24) of program directors (p < 0.01). Thirty-four percent (28/83) of fifth-year residents felt as prepared in arthroscopy as open techniques, in contrast to 58% (14/24) of program directors, who felt fifth-year residents were appropriately prepared in arthroscopic techniques (p = 0.03). The amount of surgery that residents are allowed to perform correlated significantly (p < 0.01) with confidence levels. CONCLUSIONS: Fifth-year residents who were surveyed felt less prepared in arthroscopic training, compared to open surgical procedures. Program directors surveyed over estimated confidence levels in fifth-year residents performing arthroscopic procedures. To ensure that graduating residents are appropriately prepared for the current demands of a clinical setting, it may be necessary to reexamine residency requirements to ensure adequate practice in developing arthroscopic surgical skills

Three percent of all biceps tendon ruptures occur at the distal aspect, where the tendon inserts into the radial tuberosity. Distal bicep tendon ruptures typically occur in middle-aged males after an eccentric extension load is applied to the elbow. Patients usually complain of a sudden, sharp, and painful tearing sensation in the antecubital region, with a palpable defect. The biceps squeeze and hook tests are specific maneuvers by which to diagnose distal biceps ruptures on physical examination. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or ultrasound maybe be helpful to distinguish between partial and complete tears. Anatomic studies suggest there are two distinct insertions for the short and long heads of the distal biceps. The short head may be a more powerful flexor, and the long head may be a more powerful supinator. Nonoperative treatment typically results in loss of flexion and supination strength and endurance. Early anatomic re-attachment is the goal. Surgical approaches include one- or two-incision techniques, and tendon fixation methods include the use of suture anchors, bone tunnels, an endobutton, or biotenodesis screws. Biomechanical studies have shown that endobuttons have higher load-to-failure strengths, compared to the other fixation methods. However, clinical studies have demonstrated that patients do well regardless of surgical approach or fixation method. Possible complications include nerve injuries, heterotopic ossification, postoperative fracture, tendon rerupture, complex regional pain syndrome, and wound infection. Partial ruptures are significantly less common and initially can be treated conservatively. Chronic tears are more difficult to treat because of possible tendon retraction and poor tissue quality. Tendon grafts using semitendinosus, fascia lata, hamstring, Achilles (calcaneal), or flexor carpi radialis have been successfully used for length restoration in these cases

Intra-articular hyaluronic acid viscosupplementation is gaining popularity as a treatment option in the nonoperative management of patients with osteoarthritis. Recent clinical studies have demonstrated that the anti-inflammatory, anabolic, and chondroprotective actions of hyaluronic acid reduce pain and improve patient function. With evidence mounting in support of the efficacy of this treatment modality for patients with osteoarthritis, its potential use in additional patient populations and for other pathologies affecting the knee is being investigated. The current article reviews the use of intra-articular hyaluronic acid viscosupplementation in the management of knee osteoarthritis and presents the potential for expanding its indications for other joints and alternative patient subpopulations. Additionally, future directions for the use of hyaluronic acid and areas of active research are discussed