The pyramidalis-anterior pubic ligament-adductor longus complex (PLAC) and its role with adductor injuries: a new anatomical concept.

PURPOSE: Adductor longus injuries are complex. The conflict between views in the recent literature and various nineteenth-century anatomy books regarding symphyseal and perisymphyseal anatomy can lead to difficulties in MRI interpretation and treatment decisions. The aim of the study is to systematically investigate the pyramidalis muscle and its anatomical connections with adductor longus and rectus abdominis, to elucidate injury patterns occurring with adductor avulsions. METHODS: A layered dissection of the soft tissues of the anterior symphyseal area was performed on seven fresh-frozen male cadavers. The dimensions of the pyramidalis muscle were measured and anatomical connections with adductor longus, rectus abdominis and aponeuroses examined. RESULTS: The pyramidalis is the only abdominal muscle anterior to the pubic bone and was found bilaterally in all specimens. It arises from the pubic crest and anterior pubic ligament and attaches to the linea alba on the medial border. The proximal adductor longus attaches to the pubic crest and anterior pubic ligament. The anterior pubic ligament is also a fascial anchor point connecting the lower anterior abdominal aponeurosis and fascia lata. The rectus abdominis, however, is not attached to the adductor longus; its lateral tendon attaches to the cranial border of the pubis; and its slender internal tendon attaches inferiorly to the symphysis with fascia lata and gracilis. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates a strong direct connection between the pyramidalis muscle and adductor longus tendon via the anterior pubic ligament, and it introduces the new anatomical concept of the pyramidalis-anterior pubic ligament-adductor longus complex (PLAC). Knowledge of these anatomical relationships should be employed to aid in image interpretation and treatment planning with proximal adductor avulsions. In particular, MRI imaging should be employed for all proximal adductor longus avulsions to assess the integrity of the PLAC

Proximal adductor avulsions are rarely isolated but usually involve injury to the PLAC and pectineus: Descriptive MRI findings in 145 athletes

Purpose The purpose of the study is to review the MRI findings in a cohort of athletes who sustained acute traumatic avulsions of the adductor longus fibrocartilaginous entheses, and to investigate related injuries namely the pyramidalis- anterior pubic ligament - adductor longus complex (PLAC). Associated muscle and soft tissue injuries were also assessed. Methods The MRIs were reviewed for a partial or complete avulsion of the adductor longus fibrocartilage, as well as continuity or separation of the adductor longus from the pyramidalis. The presence of a concurrent partial pectineus tear was noted. Demographic data was analysed. Linear and logistic regression was used to examine associations between injuries. Results The mean age was 32.5 (SD 10.9). The pyramidalis was absent in 3 of 145 patients. 85 of 145 athletes were professional and 52 competed in the football Premier League. 132 had complete avulsions and 13 partial. The adductor longus was in continuity with pyramidalis in 55 athletes, partially separated in seven and completely in 81 athletes. 48 athletes with a PLAC injury had a partial pectineus avulsion. Six types of PLAC injuries patterns were identified. Associated rectus abdominis injuries were rare and only occurred in five patients (3.5%). Conclusion The proximal adductor longus forms part of the PLAC and is rarely an isolated injury. The term PLAC injury is more appropriate term. MRI imaging should assess all the anatomical components of the PLAC post-injury, allowing recognition of the differentpatterns of injury

Thigh-length compression stockings and DVT after stroke

Controversy exists as to whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with invasive bladder cancer, despite randomised controlled trials of more than 3000 patients. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of such treatment on survival in patients with this disease

Azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatory actions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once per day by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatment groups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment and were twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants and local study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to the outcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936. Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) were eligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was 65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomly allocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall, 561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median 10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days (rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, no significant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24). Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restricted to patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication. Funding UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research