Faculty Bibliography

Objectives: Medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLR) using allograft tissue has several potential benefits including the absence of donor site morbidity, ability to predict graft parameters, and decreased operative time. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients following MPFLR with allograft. Our hypothesis was that there would be a low rate of recurrent instability, and excellent clinical outcomes reported.
Method(s): A retrospective review of athletes who underwent MPFL Reconstruction, with a minimum of 12-month follow-up was performed. Recurrent instability (including re-dislocation and subluxation), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, Kujala score, satisfaction, and whether they would undergo the same surgery again, were evaluated.
Result(s): Overall, follow up was attained for 131 patients with 141 knees (73.4%). The mean patient age of 25.0 years, 67.4% females, and mean time to follow-up was 46.8 months (12-111). At final follow up, the mean VAS score was 1.4 +/- 2.0, the mean Kujala score was 84.8 +/- 15.6, the mean satisfaction score was 84% +/- 26.0, and 117 (83.0%) would undergo the same procedure again if required. There was 17 (12.0%) patients that had recurrent instability, with 2 being re-dislocations (1.4%). A further procedure was performed in 14 patients (9.9%). There were no intra-operative complications in our series.
Conclusion(s): There was a low rate of recurrent instability following MPFLR with allograft, with excellent patient reported outcomes, and a low complication rate

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of osteochondral allograft (OCA) in patients older than 45 years of age, particularly with respect to return to sport. DESIGN/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective review was performed to evaluate patients greater than 45 who underwent an OCA for a symptomatic osteochondral defect of the knee between June 2011 and January 2019. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:< 0.01). Furthermore, the mean Visual Analogue Scale while playing sport was 3.4 ± 3.2, and the mean Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score was 77.5 ± 12.7 at final follow-up. Overall, 11 patients (78.6%) were able to return to their desired sport. No clinical failures were identified during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:In our series of patients 45 years and older who were treated with OCA for focal osteochondral injuries of the knee, we found a significant improvement in clinical outcome scores at a midterm follow-up of 37 months with no revision OCA procedures or conversion to any form of knee arthroplasty. In addition, a high percentage of patients were able to return to their preferred level of athletic activity.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Osteoarthritis (OA) is a debilitating joint disease characterized by progressive loss of articular cartilage. Intra-articular injections are a mainstay of nonoperative treatment, however, there is controversy as to the optimal injectable for these patients. The purpose of the current study is to perform a network meta-analysis of the randomized control trials in the literature to ascertain whether there is a superior injectable nonoperative treatment for knee OA. METHODS:The literature search was conducted based on the PRISMA guidelines. Randomized control trials (RCTs) evaluating intra-articular injectables in osteoarthritic knees were included. Data was extracted and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, where available were analyzed at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Clinical outcomes were compared using a frequentist approach to network meta-analysis, with statistical analysis performed using R. The treatment options were ranked using the P-Score. RESULTS:Seventy-nine RCTs with 8761 patients were included in this review. Intra-articular injectables evaluated included autologous conditioned serum (ACS), bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), botulinum toxin, corticosteroids (CS), hyaluronic acid (HA), mesenchymal stem cells (MSC), ozone, saline placebo, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), plasma rich in growth factor (PRGF), and stromal vascular fraction (SVF). At 4-6 weeks and 3 months of follow-up, the treatment with the highest P-Score for WOMAC score was high molecular weight (HMW) HA + CS [P-Score = 0.9500 and 8503, respectively]. At 6-months follow-up, the treatment with the highest P-Score for WOMAC score was PRP [P-Score = 0.7676]. At all post-injection time points, the treatment with the highest P-Score for VAS score [P-Score Range = 0.8631-9927] and Womac score at 12 Months [P-Score = 0.9044] was SVF. CONCLUSIONS:The current evidence shows that SVF injections result in the greatest improvement in pain and functional outcomes in patients with knee OA at up to 1 year of follow-up.

»:While the gross mechanical abnormalities contributing to posttraumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) have been well described, new research is demonstrating that these insults to the articular cartilage may also initiate changes in the joint microenvironment that seed the development of PTOA. »:A growing amount of literature has identified key biomarkers that exhibit altered expression in the synovial fluid following a knee injury, with a portion of these molecules remaining elevated in the years following an injury. »:These biomarkers have the potential to aid in the early detection of PTOA before radiographic evidence becomes apparent. Furthermore, deciphering the processes that occur within the articular microenvironment after trauma may allow for better identification of therapeutic targets for the prevention and earlier treatment of PTOA.

OBJECTIVE:The purpose of the current study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes at early to midterm follow-up between fresh precut cores versus hemi-condylar osteochondral allograft (OCAs) in the treatment of symptomatic osteochondral lesions. DESIGN/METHODS:A retrospective review of patients who underwent an OCA was performed. Patient matching between those with OCA harvested from an allograft condyle/patella or a fresh precut allograft core was performed to generate 2 comparable groups. The cartilage at the graft site was assessed with use of a modified Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART) scoring system and patient-reported outcomes were collected. RESULTS:= 0.93). CONCLUSIONS:This study found that there was no difference in patient-reported clinical outcomes or MOCART scores following OCA implantation using fresh precut OCA cores or size matched condylar grafts at early to midterm follow-up.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this double-blinded randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the use of intravenous (IV) tranexamic acid (TXA) in patients undergoing primary bone-patella tendon-bone (BTB) ACLR with regard to post-operative hemarthrosis, pain, opioid consumption, quadriceps atrophy and activation. METHODS:A controlled, randomized, double-blinded trial was conducted in 110 patients who underwent ACLR with BTB autograft. Patients were equally randomized to the control and experimental groups. The experimental group received two 1-gram boluses of IV TXA, one prior to tourniquet inflation and one prior to wound closure; the control group did not receive TXA. If a clinically significant hemarthrosis was evident, the knee was aspirated, and the volume of blood (ml) was recorded. Additionally, perioperative blood loss (ml); Visual Analog Scale (VAS) on postoperative days (POD) 1-7 and post-operative weeks (POW) 1, 6 and 12; postoperative opioid consumption POD 1-7; range of motion (ROM) and ability to straight leg raise (SLR) at POW 1, 6, 12; and pre and postoperative thigh circumference ratio (TCR). RESULTS:There was no significant difference in perioperative blood loss between the TXA and control groups (32.5ml v. 35.6ml, p=0.47). The TXA group had 23 knees aspirated; control group had 26 knees aspirated (p=0.56). No significant difference seen in postoperative hemarthrosis volume with IV TXA compared to those without (26.7ml v. 37.3ml, p=0.12). There was no significant difference in VAS score between the two groups (p=0.15), additionally, there was no difference in postoperative opioid consumption (p=0.33). There was no significant difference in ROM or ability to SLR, or post-operative TCR (p > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:IV TXA in patients who undergo ACLR with BTB autograft does not significantly impact perioperative blood loss, postoperative hemarthrosis, or postoperative pain levels. Additionally, no significant differences were seen in early post-operative recovery regarding ROM or quadriceps reactivation.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study is to survey the members of North American and European shoulder surgery & sports medicine societies to evaluate their criteria for deciding when an athlete can safely return to play (RTP) following shoulder stabilization surgery. METHODS:A survey was sent to the members of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), European Society for Sports & Knee Arthroscopy (ESSKA), and European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and the Elbow (SECEC). Surgeons were asked which criteria they used to determine when an athlete can RTP following the arthroscopic Bankart repair and Latarjet procedures, with additional questions on how time from surgery and participation in collision sports affect return. RESULTS:Overall, 317 surgeons responded to the survey. Following arthroscopic Bankart repair, the most common criteria used were time (98.7%), strength (74.8%), and range of motion (70%). The most commonly-reported time point was 4 months (43.8%), and the majority used an additional time period, most commonly 2 months (38.2%), before allowing a collision athlete to RTP (75.4%). Interestingly, the addition of a Remplissage procedure did not affect decision-making regarding RTP in most cases (92.1%). Following the Latarjet procedure, the most common criteria used were time (98.4%), strength (67.5%), and range of motion (65.9%). Less than half reported using imaging to assess for radiographic union before allowing patients to RTP (47%), and the most common modality was plain radiography (80%). The most common time point was 4 months (33.1%), and the majority reported waiting an additional period of time, most commonly by 2 months (25.9%), before allowing a collision athlete to RTP (59.6%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Despite the absence of evidence-based guidelines on when athletes can safely return to play following shoulder stabilization surgery, there exists minimal variability in recommendations between North American and European shoulder surgeons. Further research is required to better define criteria for return to play after the arthroscopic Bankart repair and Latarjet procedures.

BACKGROUND:Telemedicine has increasingly been considered as a viable alternative to traditional office-based health care, including postoperative follow-up visits. The purpose of the present study was to determine if patient satisfaction with overall care is equivalent for telemedicine follow-up (i.e., synchronous face-to-face video) and office-based follow-up after arthroscopic meniscectomy and repair. METHODS:Patients were prospectively enrolled from August 1, 2019, to March 1, 2020. Patients were included who were ≥18 years old, consented to isolated arthroscopic meniscal repair or meniscectomy, and were able to properly utilize telemedicine software on a computer, tablet, or smartphone with a built-in camera. Patient demographic data, including complication events and postoperative satisfaction data, were recorded and analyzed for significance. RESULTS:One hundred and fifty patients were enrolled in the study, of whom 122 (81.3%) were included in the final analysis. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of patient demographics or satisfaction scores. Patient satisfaction with overall care was equivalent based on the results of two 1-sided t-test analysis for equivalence (9.77 ± 0.60 in the office-based group versus 9.79 ± 0.53 in the telemedicine group; p < 0.001). When patients were asked to indicate their preferred follow-up type with the options listed as the type they received versus an alternative, 58 patients (84.1%) in the office-based group preferred their received type of follow-up, whereas 42 (79.2%) in the telemedicine group preferred their received follow-up (p = 0.493). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of complications (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:The present study showed that patient satisfaction with overall care is equivalent between telemedicine and office-based follow-up in the immediate postoperative period following an arthroscopic meniscal surgical procedure, and should be considered a reasonable alternative to the traditional in-office modality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

CASE:A 71-year-old man presented with extreme anterior knee pain. His history, physical examination, and imaging were consistent with prepatellar bursitis, but his pain seemed out of proportion for these findings. The patient eventually underwent marginal excision of the inflamed prepatellar bursa which histopathology identified as a glomangioma. Postoperatively, he has complete resolution of his pain and has returned to his daily activities. CONCLUSION:Glomus tumors are a rare cause of severe knee pain that completely resolves after excision. In the patient with extreme, localized knee sensitivity, it is important to consider this pathology even if no mass is identified on imaging.