Search

Aim: (1) To determine the interobserver reliability of magnetic resonance classifications and lesion instability criteria for capitellar osteochondritis dissecans lesions and (2) to assess differences in reliability between subgroups. Methods: Magnetic resonance images of 20 patients with capitellar osteochondritis dissecans were reviewed by 33 observers, 18 orthopaedic surgeons and 15 musculoskeletal radiologists. Observers were asked to classify the osteochondritis dissecans according to classifications developed by Hepple, Dipaola/Nelson, Itsubo, as well as to apply the lesion instability criteria of DeSmet/Kijowski and Satake. Interobserver agreement was calculated using the multirater kappa (k) coefficient. Results: Interobserver agreement ranged from slight to fair: Hepple (k = 0.23); Dipaola/Nelson (k = 0.19); Itsubo (k = 0.18); DeSmet/Kijowksi (k = 0.16); Satake (k = 0.12). When classifications/instability criteria were dichotomized into either a stable or unstable osteochondritis dissecans, there was more agreement for Hepple (k = 0.52; p =.002), Dipaola/Nelson (k = 0.38; p =.015), DeSmet/Kijowski (k = 0.42; p =.001) and Satake (k = 0.41; p <.001). Overall, agreement was not associated with the number of years in practice or the number of osteochondritis dissecans cases encountered per year (p >.05). Conclusion: One should be cautious when assigning grades using magnetic resonance classifications for capitellar osteochondritis dissecans. When making treatment decisions, one should rather use relatively simple distinctions (e.g. stable versus unstable osteochondritis dissecans; lateral wall intact versus not intact), as these are more reliable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Poor landing mechanics are considered deficits in neuromuscular control and risk factors for lower extremity injury. The Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) has been used to assess the neuromuscular control of landing mechanics for the first landing in a drop vertical jump (DVJ) task. However, the second DVJ landing may provide different results, warranting assessment.Hypotheses: (1) LESS scores will differ between first and second DVJ landings across all female participants with (2) greater intraparticipant variability among the second landing compared with the first landing scores.Study Design: Cross-sectional study.Level Of Evidence: Level 4.Methods: A total of 13 gymnasts and 31 softball players (N = 44) performed 3 DVJ trials. The mean ± SD age of 44 female athletes was 16.46 ± 2.59 years. The LESS was scored using 2-dimensional video of each trial.Results: There was a significant difference between the first and second DVJ landings (P < 0.01). All participants demonstrated higher LESS scores (worse landing mechanics) during the second DVJ landing (10.10 ± 2.25) than the first landing (6.97 ± 2.72).Conclusion: The initial landing in a DVJ has been the focus of neuromuscular control studies using the LESS. This study found worse neuromuscular control during the second DVJ landing, which highlights the importance of evaluating landing mechanics beyond the initial landing.Clinical Relevance: LESS analysis of both DVJ landings might improve neuromuscular control screening in female athletes and augment lower extremity and anterior cruciate ligament injury prevention programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Radiographs are part of routine clinical care after radial head arthroplasty (RHA). Therefore, the aim of this diagnostic study was to assess the interobserver reliability of radiographic assessment following RHA. Methods Anteroposterior (AP) and lateral radiographs of 24 consecutive patients who underwent press-fit bipolar RHA were evaluated with respect to 14 parameters by 14 orthopaedic surgeons specializing in the elbow: shaft loosening (AP, lateral), subcollar bone resorption, nonbridging heterotopic ossification, capitellar erosion, capitellar osteopenia, implant size, ulnohumeral joint gapping, ulnohumeral joint degeneration, proximal radio-ulnar joint congruency, stem size, stem positioning (AP, lateral) and component dissociation or polyethylene wear of the head with increased angulation. Observer agreement was evaluated using the multirater kappa (κ) measure. Results Nine of 14 parameters had poor interobserver agreement [κ = 0.0 to 0.20, confidence interval (CI) = 0.0 to 0.31). Four parameters had fair agreement: subcollar bone resorption (κ = 0.27, CI = 0.12 to 0.40), capitellar erosion (κ = 0.30, CI = 0.20 to 0.40), ulnohumeral joint degeneration (κ = 0.35, CI = 0.22 to 0.51) and stem positioning in AP view (κ = 0.24, CI = 0.14 to 0.36). One parameter had moderate agreement: nonbridging heterotopic ossification (κ = 0.47, CI = 0.31 to 0.64). Conclusions The overall interobserver reliability of radiographic assessment following press-fit bipolar RHA was poor among experienced elbow surgeons. Therefore, radiographic evaluation after RHA should be interpreted with caution when making treatment decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on research which was conducted to review the outcomes of lisfranc injuries treated by primary partial arthrodesis. Researchers evaluated 25 patients who underwent the procedure. They found that treatment of both primarily ligamentous and combined osseous and ligamentous lisfranc injuries with primary partial arthrodesis produced good clinical and patient-based outcomes.

Background: The actual in vivo tibiofemoral and patellofemoral kinematics of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL)-reconstructed knee joint are unknown. Hypothesis: Current single-bundle PCL reconstruction is unable to correct the abnormal tibiofemoral and patellofemoral kinematics caused by rupture of the ligament. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study/case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Seven patients with an isolated PCL injury in 1 knee and the contralateral side intact were included in the study. Magnetic resonance and dual fluoroscopic imaging techniques were used to compare the tibiofemoral and patellofemoral kinematics between the intact contralateral (control group), PCL-deficient, and PCL-reconstructed knee during physiologic loading with a single-legged lunge. Data were collected preoperatively and 2 years after single-bundle reconstruction. Results: The PCL reconstruction reduced the abnormal posterior tibial translation in PCL-deficient knees to levels not significantly different from those of the intact knee. Posterior cruciate ligament deficiency resulted in an increased lateral tibial translation between 75° and 120° of flexion, and reconstruction was unable to restore these values to normal. No differences were detected among the groups in varus-valgus and internal-external rotation. The PCL reconstruction reduced the increased patellar flexion of PCL-deficient knees between 90° and 120° of knee flexion and the lateral shift at 120°. The abnormal patellar rotation and tilt seen in PCL deficiency at flexion angles of 75° and greater persisted after reconstruction. Conclusion: Single-bundle PCL reconstruction was successful in restoring normal anteroposterior translation of the tibia, as well as the patellar flexion and shift. However, single-bundle PCL reconstruction was unable to achieve the same success in mediolateral translation of the tibia or in the patellar rotation and tilt. Clinical Relevance: The persistent abnormal mediolateral translation of the tibia, as well as decreased patellar rotation and tilt, provide a possible explanation for the development of cartilage degeneration after reconstruction of an isolated PCL injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Screw and suture fixations are the most commonly used methods of fixation in treatment of anterior cruciate ligament tibial avulsion fractures. Even though a few biomechanical studies have compared the stability of the 2 fixation techniques, a clinical comparison has not yet been reported. Hypothesis: The authors hypothesized that both fixations would be identical in all studied clinical outcome measures at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Materials and Methods: Thirty-three patients treated with either screw fixation (16 patients) or suture fixation (17 patients) within 1 month of the anterior cruciate ligament tibial avulsion fracture (type II or III) without associated ligamentous injury were included. All patients were evaluated at a minimum 2-year follow-up in terms of Lysholm knee scores and return to preinjury activities. Knee stability was compared based on the Lachman test and stress radiography. Results: No significant differences were found between the 2 groups in terms of average Lysholm knee scores (91.7 in the screw group and 92.7 in the suture group, P = .413) at follow-up. All patients except 2 (1 in each group) returned to preinjury activity levels. However, flexion contractures (5° to 10°) were found in 3 patients in the screw group and 2 patients in the suture group without significant intergroup difference. Stabilities based on the Lachman test and instrumented stress radiography were also similar between the 2 groups at follow-up. However, 2 patients in the screw group and 1 in the suture group showed more than 5 mm laxity compared with the contralateral knee on stress radiographs. Conclusion: Both the screw and suture fixation techniques for the anterior cruciate ligament tibial avulsion fracture produced relatively good results in terms of functional outcomes and stability without any significant differences. However, some patients in both groups showed residual laxity or flexion contractures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The intent of double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is to reproduce the normal anterior cruciate ligament anatomy and improve knee joint rotational stability. However, no consensus has been reached on the advantages of this technique over the single-bundle technique. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction could provide better intraoperative stability and clinical outcome than single-bundle reconstruction. Type of study: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Forty patients with anterior cruciate ligament injury in one knee were recruited; 20 were allocated to a double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction group and 20 to a single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction group. Intraoperative stabilities at 30° of knee flexion were compared between the 2 groups using a navigation system. Clinical outcomes including Lysholm knee scores, Tegner activity scores, Lachman and pivot-shift test results, and radiographic stabilities were also compared between the 2 groups after a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Results: Intraoperative anterior and rotational stabilities after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in the double-bundle group were significantly better than those in single-bundle group (P = .020 and P < .001, respectively). Nineteen patients (95%) in each group were available at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Clinical outcomes including Lysholm knee and Tegner activity scores were similar in the 2 groups at 2-year follow-up (P > .05). Furthermore, stability results of the Lachman and pivot-shift tests, and radiologic findings at 2-year follow-up failed to reveal any significant intergroup differences (P > .05). Conclusion: Although double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction produces better intraoperative stabilities than single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, the 2 modalities were found to be similar in terms of clinical outcomes and postoperative stabilities after a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]