Search

Objectives: The type of ligamentous tear and the degree of knee laxity have important guiding significance for the diagnosis and management of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears. Instrumental measurement is necessary for ACL tears since physical examination and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) cannot provide an objective and quantitative assessment of knee laxity. This study aimed to compare the application of a novel knee arthrometer and simultaneous stress radiography in differentiating between complete and partial acute ACL tears, and further assess the correlation between the two measurements. Methods: A total of 106 patients with complete acute ACL tears and 52 patients with partial acute ACL tears were included in the study. Preoperative arthrometry and simultaneous stress radiography were performed using the Ligs arthrometer at 90, 120, and 150 N to assess side‐to‐side difference (SSD) in anterior knee laxity. The optimal threshold was determined using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was used to assess the diagnostic value of the measurement. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to assess the correlation between the two measurements. Results: The optimal differential SSD thresholds in the Ligs arthrometer were 2.7 mm at 90 N, 3.8 mm at 120 N, and 4.6 mm at 150 N. Similarly, the optimal differential SSD thresholds in simultaneous stress radiography were 3.8 mm at 90 N, 5.1 mm at 120 N, and 5.6 mm at 150 N. The AUC analysis revealed that the Ligs arthrometer was fairly informative at 90 N (AUC = 0.851), 120 N (AUC = 0.878), and 150 N (AUC = 0.884), and simultaneous stress radiography was highly informative at 90 N (AUC = 0.910), 120 N (AUC = 0.925), and 150 N (AUC = 0.948). Moreover, the AUC of the combined measurements was 0.914 at 90 N, 0.931 at 120 N, and 0.951 at 150 N. A significantly strong correlation was found between the two measurements at 90 N (r = 0.743, p < 0.001), 120 N (r = 0.802, p < 0.001), and 150 N (r = 0.823, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The Ligs arthrometer and simultaneous stress radiography proved to be valid diagnostic tools to differentiate between complete and partial acute ACL tears, with a strong correlation between the two measurements in SSD values. Compared with single instrumental measurement, the combination of the two measurements can further improve the diagnostic value in this regard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Hyaluronic acid (HA) intra‐articular injection after arthroscopic knee surgery has been widely applied but its efficacy and safety remain controversial. The aim of this systematic review is to analyze the efficacy and safety of HA intra‐articular injection after arthroscopic knee surgery, and to compare the efficacy of HA with different molecular weights. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, Google scholar and the Cochrane library from inception to 16 September 2022 for English‐written articles, in order to identify randomized controlled trials that evaluated the clinical efficacy and/or safety of HA intra‐articular injection after arthroscopic knee surgery. Then we meta‐analyzed the outcomes of patients given intra‐articular HA injections postoperatively and control patients. We also evaluated the influence of HA with different molecular weights. In every calculation, sensitive analysis was performed. The visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and adverse events were selected as the primary outcome measurements, while Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Tegner score were selected as the secondary outcome measurements. Publication bias of every outcome was evaluated using egger test. Results: Fifteen studies involving 951 knees were included and 12 of them were used to performed the meta‐analysis. The results showed no significant difference between the HA group and control group according to VAS, whether assessed at less (P = 0.90) or more than 6 months (P = 0.55). Besides, there were no statistical differences between the HA group and control group according to subgroup analysis (Ps = 0.77, 0.91 and 0.81 in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, meniscectomy and overall groups, respectively). Compared to control group, the overall effect of WOMAC score showed no significant differences (P = 0.25), nor did in two subgroups (P = 0.37 and P = 0.22). Outcomes measured by Lysholm (P = 0.13), IKDC (P = 0.86) and Tegner (P = 0.42) scores showed no significant differences, either. The analysis of the risk of adverse events indicated no increase in HA groups (P = 0.06). We found no significant differences between high‐ and low‐molecular‐weight HA at 6 (P = 0.96) or 12 months (P = 0.93) postoperatively. Two studies failed to pass the sensitive analysis and the reasons were discussed detailly and acceptable publication bias was observed. Conclusions: Although HA injection after arthroscopic knee surgery is safe, the available evidence does not support its efficacy in pain relief and functional recovery. Therefore, the application of HA injection after arthroscopic knee surgery is not recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]