Search

Background: Contemporary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) suture repair techniques have been subject to renewed interest in recent years. Although several clinical studies have yielded good short-term results, high-quality evidence is lacking in regard to the effectiveness of this treatment compared with ACL reconstruction. Hypothesis: Dynamic augmented ACL suture repair is at least as effective as anatomic single-bundle ACL reconstruction for the treatment of acute ACL rupture in terms of patient self-reported outcomes at 2 years postoperatively. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: After stratification and randomization, 48 patients underwent either dynamic augmented ACL suture repair or ACL reconstruction with a single-bundle, all-inside, semitendinosus technique. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score at 2 years postoperatively was the primary outcome measure. Patient-reported outcomes (IKDC subjective score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Tegner score, visual analog scale for satisfaction), clinical outcomes (IKDC physical examination score, leg symmetry index for the quadriceps, hamstrings strength, and jump test battery), and radiological outcomes as well as adverse events including reruptures were recorded. Analyses were based on an intention-to-treat principle. Results: The lower limit for the median IKDC subjective score of the repair group (86.2) fell within the prespecified noninferiority margin, confirming noninferiority of dynamic augmented ACL suture repair compared with ACL reconstruction. No statistical difference was found between groups for median IKDC subjective score (repair, 95.4; reconstruction, 94.3). Overall, 2 reruptures (8.7%) occurred in the dynamic ACL suture repair group and 4 reruptures (19.0%) in the ACL reconstruction group; further, 5 repeat surgeries—other than for revision ACL surgery—took place in 4 patients from the dynamic ACL suture repair group (20.8%) and in 3 patients from the ACL reconstruction group (14.3%). Conclusion: Dynamic augmented ACL suture repair is not inferior to ACL reconstruction in terms of subjective patient-reported outcomes as measured with the IKDC subjective score 2 years postoperatively. However, for reasons other than revision ACL surgery due to rerupture, a higher number of related adverse events leading to repeat surgery were seen in the dynamic augmented ACL suture repair group within 2 years postoperatively. Clinical Relevance: Dynamic augmented ACL suture repair might be a viable treatment option for patients with an acute ACL rupture. Registration: NCT02310854 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is today's surgical gold standard for ACL rupture. Although it provides satisfactory results, not all patients return to their previous activity level and moreover, early posttraumatic osteoarthritis is not prevented. As such, a renewed interest has emerged in ACL suture repair combined with dynamic augmentation. Compared to ACL reconstruction, the hypothesized advantages of ACL suture repair are earlier return to sports, reduction of early posttraumatic osteoarthritis and preservation of the patient's native ACL tissue and proprioceptive envelope of the knee. In recent literature, ACL suture repair combined with dynamic augmentation tends to be at least equally effective compared to ACL reconstruction, but no randomized comparative study has yet been conducted.Methods/design: This study is a prospective, stratified, block randomized controlled trial. Forty-eight patients with an ACL rupture will be assigned to either a suture repair group with dynamic augmentation and microfracture of the femoral notch, or an ACL reconstruction group with autologous semitendinosis graft and all-inside technique. The primary objective is to investigate the hypothesis that suture repair of a ruptured ACL results in at least equal effectiveness compared with an ACL reconstruction in terms of patient self-reported outcomes (IKDC 2000 subjective scale) 1 year postoperatively. Secondary objectives are to evaluate patient self-reported outcomes (IKDC 2000, KOOS, Tegner, VAS), re-rupture rate, rehabilitation time required for return to daily and sports activities, achieved levels of sports activity, clinimetrics (Rolimeter, LSI, Isoforce) and development of osteoarthritis, at short term (6 weeks, 3, 6 and 9 months and 1 year), midterm (2 and 5 years) and long term (10 years) postoperatively.Discussion: A renewed interest has emerged in ACL suture repair combined with dynamic augmentation in the treatment of ACL rupture. Recent cohort studies show good short- and midterm results for this technique. This randomized controlled trial has been designed to compare the outcome of suture repair of a ruptured ACL, combined with DIS as well as microfracture of the femoral notch, with ACL reconstruction using autologous semitendinosus.Trial Registration: Clinical Trials Register NCT02310854 (retrospectively registered on December 1st, 2014). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

User acceptance of myoelectric forearm prostheses is currently low. Awkward control, lack of feedback, and difficult training are cited as primary reasons. Recently, researchers have focused on exploiting the new possibilities offered by advancements in prosthetic technology. Alternatively, researchers could focus on prosthesis acceptance by developing functional requirements based on activities users are likely to perform. In this article, we describe the process of determining such requirements and then the application of these requirements to evaluating the state of the art in myoelectric forearm prosthesis research. As part of a needs assessment, a workshop was organized involving clinicians (representing end users), academics, and engineers. The resulting needs included an increased number of functions, lower reaction and execution times, and intuitiveness of both control and feedback systems. Reviewing the state of the art of research in the main prosthetic subsystems (electromyographic [EMG] sensing, control, and feedback) showed that modern research prototypes only partly fulfill the requirements. We found that focus should be on validating EMG-sensing results with patients, improving simultaneous control of wrist movements and grasps, deriving optimal parameters for force and position feedback, and taking into account the psychophysical aspects of feedback, such as intensity perception and spatial acuity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a very common procedure in orthopedic surgery. In the Netherlands, 25,642 primary THAs were performed in 2013. Postoperative hip dislocation is one of the major complications and has been reported in 0.5 to 10.6 % of patients after primary THA. Several reports regarding the use of an anterolateral surgical approach have shown that a non-restriction or reduced restriction protocol does not increase the dislocation rate. For the posterolateral surgical approach it has been suggested that patient restrictions might be unnecessary but the amount of available literature is scarce. As such, randomized controlled trials aimed at investigating restrictions following THA using a posterior approach are strongly recommended. The aim of this prospective randomized controlled trial is to investigate the non-inferiority hypothesis concerning the early dislocation rate after THA in patients with and without the use of a reduced restriction protocol., Methods/design: After providing informed consent a group of 456 patients with symptomatic coxarthrosis will be randomized to receive a THA either with care as usual, i.e. receiving postoperative restrictions including the advice to sleep in a supine position for the first 8 weeks postoperatively, or reduced restrictions with no recommendations regarding the position during sleeping. Primary outcome measure will be the percentage of early dislocations within the first 8 weeks after THA. Secondary outcome measures will be patient satisfaction, time to functional recovery, quality of sleep and patient's self-reported compliance with postoperative instructions., Discussion: To our knowledge this will be the first randomized controlled trial that compares a reduced restriction protocol with a restricted protocol following THA using a posterolateral surgical approach. Our hypothesis is that a reduced restriction protocol following THA with use of a posterolateral surgical approach has no influence on the early dislocation rate compared to a restricted protocol. Instead, embracing a reduced restriction protocol might even contribute to a higher quality of sleep, thereby facilitating a faster uptake and return to daily functions in patients after THA., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02107248 , registration date 3 April 2014.