Controversies in ACL revision surgery: Italian expert group consensus and state of the art

Background Revision ACL reconstruction is a complex topic with many controversies and not-easy-to-make decisions. The authors' aim is to provide some feasible advice that can be applied in daily clinical practice with the goal of facilitating the decision-making process and improving the outcomes of patients subjected to revision ACL reconstruction. Methods A national survey with seven questions about the most controversial topics in revision ACL reconstruction was emailed to members of two societies: SIOT and SIAGASCOT. The participants' answers were collected, the most recent literature was analyzed, and a consensus was created by the authors, according to their long-term surgical experience. Conclusions The decision-making process in revision ACL reconstruction starts with a standardized imaging protocol (weight-bearing radiographs, CT scan, and MRI). One-stage surgery is indicated in almost all cases (exceptions are severe tunnel enlargement and infection), while the choice of graft depends on the previously used graft and the dimensions of the tunnels, with better clinical outcomes obtained for autografts. Additional procedures such as lateral extra-articular tenodesis in high-grade pivot-shift knees, biplanar HTO in the case of severe coronal malalignment, and meniscal suture improve the clinical outcome and should be considered case by case

No difference at two years between all inside transtibial technique and traditional transtibial technique in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Background: one of the most recent technique is the “all inside” anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. One of the main characteristic ofthis procedure is the sparing of the tibial cortex. Furthermore, the all-inside technique requires only one tendon harvested. Purpose: the present study describes two year clinical outcomes of the all-inside method for ACL reconstruction, and compares them with clinical results of a group of patients treated with the traditional transtibial single-bundle ACL reconstruction technique using the semitendinosus and gracilis tendons (ST-G). Study design: pilot study, using historical controls. Methods: ACL reconstruction was performed on two groups of 20 patients each. The patients in one group underwent the all-inside transtibial technique with ST tendon alone. The second group underwent ACL reconstruction with the traditional transtibial single-bundle procedure using quadrupled ST-G tendons. Follow up at 24 months was undertaken using the IKDC, VAS pain score, Lysholm and Tegner scales. Results: the VAS pain score for the traditional ACL group was 84.6 ± 12.6; whereas the score for the all-inside group was 81.6 ± 13.1, with no statistically significant differences between the two groups. In the traditional ACL reconstruction group the Lysholm scale gave a “good results” for 7 patient (35%) and “excellent results” for 13 patients (65%) and the all-inside group gave “sufficient results” for 4 patients (20%), “good results” for 7 patients (35%) and “excellent results” for 9 patients (45%) (n.s.). The median of Tegner score was 6.5 (2-10) for the standard method group and 6 (1-9) for the all-inside group (n.s). The IKDC evaluated 50% of patients from the standard technique group as class A, and 45% as class B and 5% as class C. As regards patients of the all inside technique 55% were class A, 40% class B and, here too, just 5% scored as class C. No patients were classed as group D in each group. Conclusions: this study suggests that, in respect to return to sports and adequate articular function, there are no differences between the all-inside transtibial ACL reconstruction technique and the traditional transtibial ACL reconstruction using ST-G. The role of all-inside transtibial ACL reconstruction remains dubious. Level of evidence: III or Level C according with Oxford Center of EB

New trends in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A systematic review of national surveys of the last 5 years

The purpose of this study was to analyze national surveys of orthopaedic surgeons on anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction to determine their preferences related to the preferred graft, femoral tunnel positioning, fixation and tensioning methods, antibiotic and anti-thromboembolic prophylaxis, and use of tourniquet and drains. A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library was performed. Inclusion criteria were surveys of ACL reconstruction trends and preferences published in the past 5 years (2011\u20132016), involving members of national societies of orthopaedics. Information regarding survey modalities, population surveyed, graft choice both in the general or in the athletic population, surgical technique, fixation, use of antibiotic, tourniquet, drains, and anti-thromboembolic prophylaxis was extracted. Eight national surveys were included from Europe (three), North or Latin America (three), and Asia (two). Overall, 7,420 questionnaires were sent, and 1,495 participants completed the survey (response rate ranging from 16 to 76.6%). All surveys reported the hamstring tendon (HT) autograft as the preferred graft, ranging from 45 to 89% of the surveyed population, followed by bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) graft (2\u201341%) and allograft (2\u201317%). Only two surveys focusing on graft choice in athletic population underlined how in high-demand sportive population the graft choices changes in favor of BPTB. Single-bundle reconstruction was the preferred surgical technique in the four surveys that investigated this issue. Five surveys were in favor of anteromedial (AM) portal and two in favor of trans-tibial technique. Suspension devices for femoral fixation were the preferred choice in all but one survey, while interference screws were the preferred method for tibial fixation. The two surveys that investigated graft tensioning were in favor of manual tensioning. The use of tourniquet, antibiotics, drains, and anti-thromboembolic prophylaxis were vaguely reported. A trend toward the preference of HT autograft was registered in all the surveys; however, sport participation has been highlighted as an important variable for increased use of BPTB. Single-bundle reconstruction with AM portal technique and suspension femoral

Autologous Matrix-Induced Chondrogenesis (AMIC) and AMIC Enhanced by Autologous Concentrated Bone Marrow Aspirate (BMAC) Allow for Stable Clinical and Functional Improvements at up to 9 Years Follow-Up: Results from a Randomized Controlled Study

The aims of the study were to evaluate long-term outcomes after autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC) in the treatment of focal chondral lesions and to assess the possible improvements given by the combination of this technique with bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC). Twenty-four patients (age range 18–55 years) affected by focal knee chondral lesions were treated with standard AMIC or AMIC enhanced by BMAC (AMIC+). Pain (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)) and functional scores (Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)) were collected pre-operatively and then at 6, 12, 24, 60, and 100 months after treatment. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluation was performed pre-operatively and at 6, 12, and 24 months follow-ups. Patients treated with AMIC+ showed higher Lysholm scores (p = 0.015) and lower VAS (p = 0.011) in comparison with patients in the standard AMIC group at the 12 months follow-up. Both treatments allowed for functional and pain improvements with respect to pre-operative levels lasting up to 100 months. MRI revealed consistent cartilage repair at 24 months in both groups. This study shows that AMIC and AMIC+ are effective treatments for focal chondral lesions with beneficial effect lasting up to 9 years. AMIC+ allows for faster recovery from injury, and is thus more indicated for patients requiring a prompt return to activity. Level of evidence: II, randomized controlled trial in an explorative cohort

Italian consensus conference on guidelines for conservative treatment on lower limb muscle injuries in athlete

Provide the state of the art concerning (1) biology and aetiology, (2) classification, (3) clinical assessment and (4) conservative treatment of lower limb muscle injuries (MI) in athletes. Seventy international experts with different medical backgrounds participated in the consensus conference. They discussed and approved a consensus composed of four sections which are presented in these documents. This paper represents a synthesis of the consensus conference, the following four sections are discussed: (i) The biology and aetiology of MIs. A definition of MI was formulated and some key points concerning physiology and pathogenesis of MIs were discussed. (ii) The MI classification. A classification of MIs was proposed. (iii) The MI clinical assessment, in which were discussed anamnesis, inspection and clinical examination and are provided the relative guidelines. (iv) The MI conservative treatment, in which are provided the guidelines for conservative treatment based on the severity of the lesion. Furthermore, instrumental therapy and pharmacological treatment were discussed. Knowledge of the aetiology and biology of MIs is an essential prerequisite in order to plan and conduct a rehabilitation plan. Another important aspect is the use of a rational MI classification on prognostic values. We propose a classification based on radiological investigations performed by ultrasonography and MRI strongly linked to prognostic factors. Furthermore, the consensus conference results will able to provide fundamental guidelines for diagnostic and rehabilitation practice, also considering instrumental therapy and pharmacological treatment of MI. Expert opinion, level IV

Italian consensus statement for the use of allografts in ACL reconstructive surgery

Graft choice for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) is debated, with considerable controversy and variability among surgeons. Autograft tendons are actually the most used grafts for primary surgery; however, allografts have been used in greater frequency for both primary and revision ACL surgery over the past decade. Given the great debate on the use of allografts in ACL-R, the "Allografts for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction" consensus statement was developed among orthopedic surgeons and members of SIGASCOT (Società Italiana del Ginocchio, Artroscopia, Sport, Cartilagine, Tecnologie Ortopediche), with extensive experience in ACL-R, to investigate their habits in the use of allograft in different clinical situations. The results of this consensus statement will serve as benchmark information for future research and will help surgeons to facilitate the clinical decision making

Distal realignment and patellar autologous chondrocyte implantation: mid-term results in a selected population.

none7Epub 2008 Oct 22.GIGANTE A; ENEA D; F. GRECO; BAIT C; DENTI M; SCHONHUBER H; VOLPI PGigante, ANTONIO POMPILIO; Enea, D; Greco, Francesco; Bait, C; Denti, M; Schonhuber, H; Volpi, P