Search

Background: Medial meniscal ramp lesions are disruptions at the meniscocapsular junction and/or meniscotibial attachment of the posterior horn of the medial meniscus, and occur in up to 42% of all acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears1,3-5. Ramp lesions are frequently missed because of the limited diagnostic sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), physical examination, and standard anterior compartment arthroscopic exploration4,6,7. Arthroscopic evaluation of ramp lesions often requires a modified Gillquist maneuver and/or a posteromedial accessory portal for adequate assessment of the posteromedial "blind spot."4,8-10 Clinically, ramp lesions are associated with increased preoperative anterior knee instability, which may increase the risk of ACL graft failure if left untreated6,13. Although long-term comparative data on ramp-repair techniques are limited, proper arthroscopic assessment and treatment is recommended for all patients with ramp lesions at the time of ACL reconstruction (ACLR)1-5. In the present video article, we demonstrate a systematic approach for the identification and assessment of ramp lesions and describe a mini-open inside-out arthroscopically assisted repair technique for unstable ramp lesions at the time of ACLR. Description: (1) The patient is placed in the supine position, and a contralateral leg holder is utilized to create more working room on the medial side. (2) Standard diagnostic arthroscopy is performed through anteromedial and anterolateral portals. (3) Next, with the arthroscope in the anterolateral portal, the scope is advanced through the intercondylar notch with the knee in 30° of flexion in order to inspect the posterior horn of the medial meniscus. Probing is directed both over the superior aspect of the posterior horn to assess for tears, separation, and/or displacement of the meniscocapsular junction, and under the inferior aspect of the posterior horn to assess the integrity of the meniscotibial attachment. (4) After confirmation of a ramp tear, an open dissection is carried out through the sartorial fascia, with blunt dissection performed anterior to the medial gastrocnemius and above the semimembranosus to create the posteromedial surgical site. (5) A suture-shuttling device is utilized, and the corresponding cannula is placed into the anterolateral portal and directed toward the tear under arthroscopic visualization from the anteromedial portal. (6) Next, the first needle is passed through the meniscus, and the second is delivered through the adjacent capsule to create a vertical or oblique suture pattern. The needles are retrieved from the posteromedial surgical site and promptly cut, and the sutures are tied. (7) Multiple sutures, both above (femoral) and below (tibial) the meniscus, are placed 3 to 5 mm apart in a similar fashion. (8) On completion of the repair, the meniscocapsular junction is probed in order to confirm adequate stability with minimal translation of the medial meniscus. Alternatives: In the setting of an ACL tear, surgical options for concomitant repair of an unstable ramp lesion include all-inside, inside-out, or hybrid techniques (i.e., outside-in, inside-in, and/or all-inside). Rationale: Repair of ramp lesions using an inside-out technique restores preoperative excessive knee instability, which may decrease the risk of ACL graft failure. In addition, an inside-out ramp repair has a reported low secondary meniscectomy rate (2%), offers flexibility regarding the number and placement of the sutures, and creates a potentially stronger repair; however, this procedure is more technically challenging compared with other repair techniques6,10. All-inside ramp repairs have been reported to have higher secondary meniscectomy rates, ranging from 11% to 31%, because of the inability to repair the meniscotibial ligament from the anterior portals13,14. Suture hook repair using a posteromedial portal is becoming more popular and reportedly has a significantly lower secondary meniscectomy rate compared with all-inside techniques (19% compared with 30.6%)15. Expected Outcomes: At a minimum of 2 years of follow-up, DePhillipo et al. reported similar clinical outcomes and return to sports for patients who underwent combined ACLR plus inside-out repair of ramp lesions (n = 50) compared with a matched cohort who underwent isolated ACLR (n = 50). Although the ACLR plus ramp lesion repair group had had significantly greater preoperative knee instability compared with the isolated ACLR group, there was no difference in postoperative instability between groups at an average of 2.8 years (range, 2 to 8 years) of follow-up6. Important Tips: The exterior posteromedial incision should be facilitated by inside-out transillumination of the medial compartment and by palpation using an intra-articular probe at the medial aspect of the joint in order to avoid saphenous vein injury10. Two-thirds of the posteromedial incision should be distal to the joint line, with one-third proximal, because the suture needles often angle downwards as they exit the capsule10. The pes anserinus tendons should be retracted during the posteromedial dissection in order to avoid injury to the saphenous nerve (which lies posteromedial to the tendons)10. 70° to 90° of flexion relaxes the hamstring and gastrocnemius, which improves visualization and aids in retrieval of the suture needles as they exit the posterior capsule10. Entering the anterolateral portal with the suture-delivery device decreases the risk of neurovascular damage and optimizes the direction of the needle10. After placement of the first needle, keep slight tension on the first suture to avoid inadvertent suture damage during advancement of the second needle10. Recent reports have suggested that ramp lesions can occur in isolation without ACL injury or accompanying isolated or combined posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) tears. Do not forget to assess for ramp lesions in these scenarios16. Acronyms: ACL = anterior cruciate ligament PCL = posterior cruciate ligament MMBH = medial meniscus bucket-handle MRI = magnetic resonance imaging MFC = medial femoral condyle MTP = medial tibial plateau PMC = posteromedial capsule MM = medial meniscus AT = adductor tubercle sMCL = superficial medial collateral ligament SM = semimembranosus MGT = medial head of gastrocnemius tendon ACLR = anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction PROMs = patient-reported outcome measures MTL = meniscotibial ligament [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design. Retrospective cohort study. Objective. Characterize physical therapy (PT) utilization following single-level posterior lumbar fusion (PLF). Summary of Background Data. PLF is a common procedure that is increasing in frequency. After such surgeries, PT may be considered to facilitate mobilization and return to activities. However, the usage of such therapy has not been well-characterized in the literature. Materials and Methods. Patients undergoing single-level PLF were identified from the 2010 to 2021 PearlDiver administrative database. These patients were stratified based on usage of therapy, home versus outpatient therapy, and timing of therapy within the year after surgery. To determine predictors of therapy, patient characteristics were determined and multivariable regressions were performed. Results. A total of 213,240 patients undergoing single-level PLF were identified, of which therapy was done in the year after surgery for 63,231 (29.0%, of which home therapy accounted for 16.5% of therapy visits). Of those who utilized PT, the average number of visits was 10.6±10.6. Home therapy peaked within the first month after surgery and outpatient therapy peaked at month two. Factors associated with any PT following PLF in decreasing odds ratio (OR) were having commercial insurance (OR: 1.68), being from the Northeast (OR: 1.41), age (OR: 1.13 for 70+ of age) female sex (OR: 1.09), and ECI (OR: 1.04 per point) (P< 0.001 for all). Of those who received therapy, factors associated with home PT utilization were being from the Northeast (OR: 2.55), age (OR: 1.91 for 70+ of age), Medicaid insurance (OR: 1.48), female sex (OR: 1.39), and interbody fusion (OR:1.07) (P<0.001 for all). Conclusions. After single-level PLF, the minority of patients received home or outpatient PT. Of those who did, there was significant variation in the number of visits, with nonmedical factors such as insurance plan and geographic region being strongly associated suggesting room for more consistent practice patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In adults with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears, bone bruises on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans provide insight into the underlying mechanism of injury. There is a paucity of literature that has investigated these relationships in children with ACL tears. Purpose: To examine and compare the number and location of bone bruises between contact and noncontact ACL tears in pediatric patients. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Boys ≤14 years and girls ≤12 years of age who underwent primary ACL reconstruction surgery between 2018 and 2022 were identified at 3 separate institutions. Eligibility criteria required detailed documentation of the mechanism of injury and MRI performed within 30 days of the initial ACL tear. Patients with congenital lower extremity abnormalities, concomitant fractures, injuries to the posterolateral corner and/or posterior cruciate ligament, previous ipsilateral knee injuries or surgeries, or closed physes evident on MRI scans were excluded. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on a contact or noncontact mechanism of injury. Preoperative MRI scans were retrospectively reviewed for the presence of bone bruises in the coronal and sagittal planes using fat-suppressed T2-weighted images and a grid-based mapping technique of the tibiofemoral joint. Results: A total of 109 patients were included, with 76 (69.7%) patients sustaining noncontact injuries and 33 (30.3%) patients sustaining contact injuries. There were no significant differences between the contact and noncontact groups in terms of age (11.8 ± 2.0 vs 12.4 ± 1.3 years; P =.12), male sex (90.9% vs 88.2%; P >.99), time from initial injury to MRI (10.3 ± 8.1 vs 10.4 ± 8.9 days; P =.84), the presence of a concomitant medial meniscus tear (18.2% vs 14.5%; P =.62) or lateral meniscus tear (69.7% vs 52.6%; P =.097), and sport-related injuries (82.9% vs 81.8%; P =.89). No significant differences were observed in the frequency of combined lateral tibiofemoral (lateral femoral condyle + lateral tibial plateau) bone bruises (87.9% contact vs 78.9% noncontact; P =.41) or combined medial tibiofemoral (medial femoral condyle [MFC] + medial tibial plateau) bone bruises (54.5% contact vs 35.5% noncontact; P =.064). Patients with contact ACL tears were significantly more likely to have centrally located MFC bruising (odds ratio, 4.3; 95% CI, 1.6-11; P =.0038) and less likely to have bruising on the anterior aspect of the lateral tibial plateau (odds ratio, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.097-0.76; P =.013). Conclusion: Children with contact ACL tears were 4 times more likely to present with centrally located MFC bone bruises on preoperative MRI scans compared with children who sustained noncontact ACL tears. Future studies should investigate the relationship between these bone bruise patterns and the potential risk of articular cartilage damage in pediatric patients with contact ACL tears. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]