Effects of biophysical stimulation in patients undergoing arthroscopic reconstruction of anterior cruciate ligament: prospective, randomized and double blind study

Pre-clinical studies have shown that treatment by pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs) can limit the catabolic effects of pro-inflammatory cytokines on articular cartilage and favour the anabolic activity of the chondrocytes. Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is usually performed by arthroscopic procedure that, even if minimally invasive, may elicit an inflammatory joint reaction detrimental to articular cartilage. In this study the effect of I-ONE PEMFs treatment in patients undergoing ACL reconstruction was investigated. The study end-points were (1) evaluation of patients’ functional recovery by International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Form; (2) use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), necessary to control joint pain and inflammation. The study design was prospective, randomized and double blind. Sixty-nine patients were included in the study at baseline. Follow-up visits were scheduled at 30, 60 and 180 days, followed by 2-year follow-up interview. Patients were evaluated by IKDC Form and were asked to report on the use of NSAIDs. Patients were randomized to active or placebo treatments; active device generated a magnetic field of 1.5 mT at 75 Hz. Patients were instructed to use the stimulator (I-ONE) for 4 h per day for 60 days. All patients underwent ACL reconstruction with use of quadruple hamstrings semitendinosus and gracilis technique. At baseline there were no differences in the IKDC scores between the two groups. At follow-up visits the SF-36 Health Survey score showed a statistically significant faster recovery in the group of patients treated with I-ONE stimulator (P < 0.05). NSAIDs use was less frequent among active patients than controls (P < 0.05). Joint swelling resolution and return to normal range of motion occurred faster in the active treated group (P < 0.05) too. The 2-year follow-up did not shown statistically significant difference between the two groups. Furthermore for longitudinal analysis the generalized linear mixed effects model was applied to calculate the group × time interaction coefficient; this interaction showed a significant difference (P < 0.0001) between the active and placebo groups for all investigated variables: SF-36 Health Survey, IKDC Subjective Knee Evaluation and VAS. Twenty-nine patients (15 in the active group; 14 in the placebo group) underwent both ACL reconstruction and meniscectomy; when they were analysed separately the differences in SF-36 Health Survey scores between the two groups were larger then what observed in the whole study group (P < 0.05). The results of this study show that patient’s functional recovery occurs earlier in the active group. No side effects were observed and the treatment was well tolerated. The use of I-ONE should always be considered after ACL reconstruction, particularly in professional athletes, to shorten the recovery time, to limit joint inflammatory reaction and its catabolic effects on articular cartilage and ultimately for joint preservation

Fracture Pattern Influences Radial Head Replacement Size Determination Among Experienced Elbow Surgeons

Background: Correct sizing is challenging in radial head replacement and no consensus exists on the implant’s optimal height and width to avoid elbow stiffness and instability. Studies exists, suggesting how to appropriately choose the implant size, but the manner by which the fracture pattern influences the surgeons’ operative choices was not investigated. Methods: The radial heads of four fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens were excised, measured, and fractured to simulate four patterns: three fragments (A); four fragments (B); comminuted (C); comminuted with bone loss (D). Nine examiners were asked to indicate first the maximum diameter of the radial heads with the help of dedicated sizing dishes and then the appropriate implant size with trial implants. Accuracy and precision were determined. A coefficient of variation was calculated and agreement was evaluated with the Bland–Altman method. Results: Accuracy and precision of radial head diameter estimation with dedicated sizing dish were 96.73% and 93.64%, (best pattern, D; worst, C). Accuracy and precision of radial head diameter estimation with trial implants were 99.71% and 90.66% (best pattern, A; worst, D). Frequent modifications occurred between the initial radial head size proposal based on the sizing dish and the radial head size chosen after use of the trial implants (47.2%). Conclusions: Diameter estimation of radial heads with dedicated sizing dishes may be underestimated in comminuted fractures; when bone loss is present, this may lead to an overestimation, especially when using trial implants. Care is essential to determine the optimal size of the implant and to avoid overlenghtening and oversizing, which can be responsible for implant failure. Level of Evidence: Basic Science Study. Clinical Relevance: Knowledge of the manner by which the fracture pattern influences radial head replacement size estimation can help preventing overlenghtening and oversizing during this procedure

Modified anteromedial and anterolateral elbow arthroscopy portals show superiority to standard portals in guiding arthroscopic radial head screw fixation

Purpose Arthroscopic fixation of radial head radial head fractures is an appealing alternative to open reduction and internal fixation, which presents the advantage of minimal surgical trauma. The aim of this study was to evaluate if modifications to the standard anteromedial (AM) and anterolateral (AL) portals could allow screw placement for radial head fracture osteosynthesis closer to the plane of the radial head articular surface. Methods Eight fresh-frozen specimens were prepared to mimic arthroscopic setting. Standard AL (ALst) and AM (AMst) and distal AL (ALdi) and AM (AMdi) portals were established. Eleven independent examiners were asked to indicate the optimal trajectory, when aiming to place a cannulated screw parallel to the radial head surface for radial head osteosynthesis. A three-dimensional digital protractor was used to measure the angle between the indicated position and a Kirschner wire placed parallel to the radial head articular surface (alpha). The Shapiro-Wilk normality test was used to evaluate the normal distribution of the samples. Means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated for each portal. A coefficient of variation (CoV) was calculated to determine agreement among observers and intra-observer variability. Results Mean alpha angles were 25.1 +/- 11.5 degrees for AMst, 13.8 +/- 4.8 degrees for AMdi, 17.1 +/- 13.4 degrees for ALst, -2.6 +/- 9.2 degrees for ALdi. No overlapping in the 95% CI of ipsilateral standard and distal portals was observed, indicating that the difference between these means was statistically significant. The distal portals showed smaller inter-observer CoV as compared to the standard ones (AMst: 10.0%; AMdi: 4.6%; ALst: 12.5%; ALdi: 10.6%). Intra-observer CoV was similar for all portals (AMst: 5.5%; AMdi: 6.1%; ALst: 7.7%; ALdi: 7.1%). Conclusions The use of distal AM and AL portals permits to obtain alpha angles closer to the radial head articular surface than standard AM and AL portals. This is expected to allow screw placement in a flatter trajectory, which should correlate with a superior biomechanical performance of fixation. Good reproducibility of Kirschner wire placement from distal portals was observer among different examiners. Modifications to the standard AM and AL elbow arthroscopy portals allow to place screws for radial head fracture osteosynthesis in a position which should guarantee superior biomechanical performance of fixation

Locating the ulnar nerve during elbow arthroscopy using palpation is only accurate proximal to the medial epicondyle

Purpose: Knowledge of ulnar nerve position is of utmost importance to avoid iatrogenic injury in elbow arthroscopy. The aim of this study was to determine how accurate surgeons are in locating the ulnar nerve after fluid extravasation has already occurred, and basing their localization solely on palpation of anatomical landmarks. Methods: Seven cadaveric elbows were used and seven experienced surgeons in elbow arthroscopy participated. An arthroscopic setting was simulated and fluids were pumped into the joint from the posterior compartment for 15 min. For each cadaveric elbow, one surgeon was asked to locate the ulnar nerve solely by palpation of the anatomical landmarks, and subsequently pin the ulnar nerve at two positions: within 5 cm proximal and another within 5 cm distal of a line connecting the medial epicondyle and the tip of the olecranon. Subsequently, the elbows were dissected using a standard medial elbow approach and the distances between the pins and ulnar nerve were measured. Results: The median distance between the ulnar nerve and the proximal pins was 0 mm (range 0–0 mm), and between the ulnar nerve and the distal pins was 2 mm (range 0–10 mm), showing a statistically significant difference (p = 0.009). All seven proximally placed pins (100%) transfixed the ulnar nerve versus two out of seven distally placed pins (29%) (p = 0.021). Conclusions: In a setting simulating an already initiated arthroscopic procedure, the sole palpation of the anatomical landmarks allows experienced elbow surgeons to accurately locate the ulnar nerve only in its course proximal to the medial epicondyle (7/7, 100%), whereas a significantly reduced accuracy is documented when the same surgeons attempt to locate the nerve distal to the medial epicondyle (2/7, 29%; p = 0.021). Current findings support the establishment of a proximal anteromedial portal over a distal anteromedial portal to access the anterior compartment after tissue extravasation has occurred with regard to ulnar nerve safety

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