Search

Introduction: Articular cartilage injuries of the knee are a complex and challenging clinical pathology. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a Delphi process on concomitant procedures for knee cartilage injuries. Methods: A consensus process on knee cartilage injuries utilizing a modified Delphi technique was conducted. Seventy-nine surgeons across 17 countries participated in these consensus statements. Twelve questions were generated on concomitant procedures, with 3 rounds of questionnaires and final voting occurring. Consensus was defined as achieving 80% to 89% agreement, whereas strong consensus was defined as 90% to 99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was defined as 100% agreement with a proposed statement. Results: Of the 12 total questions and consensus statements on concomitant procedures developed from 3 rounds of voting, 0 achieved unanimous consensus, 5 achieved strong consensus, 5 achieved consensus, and 2 did not achieve consensus. Conclusions: The statements achieving consensus were primarily related to the tibiofemoral joint, meniscal insufficiency, and ligamentous stability. Concomitant procedures, including osteotomy, meniscal repair or transplantation, and ligamentous repair or reconstruction, should be performed with cartilage procedures for the most optimal outcome. The statements that did not reach consensus were related to the patellofemoral joint and unloading osteotomies in patients with normal alignment.

Introduction Pain and disability after meniscectomy can be a substantial lifelong problem. There are few treatment options, especially for young people. Non-surgical management (rehabilitation) is an option but increasingly surgeons are performing meniscal allograft transplants (MATs) for these individuals. However, this is still an uncommon procedure, and availability and usage of MAT vary widely both in the UK and internationally. It is not known which treatment option is the most effective and cost-effective.Methods and analysis The Meniscal Transplant surgery or Optimised Rehabilitation trial is an international, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. The aim is to compare the clinical and cost effectiveness of MAT versus an optimised package of individualised, progressive, rehabilitation that we have called personalised knee therapy (PKT).Participants will be recruited from sites across the UK, Australia, Canada and Belgium. The planned 144 participants provide at least 90% power to detect a 10-point difference in the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS4) at 24-months post randomisation (primary outcome). A prospectively planned economic evaluation will be conducted from a healthcare system and personal social services perspective. Secondary outcome data including health utility, occupational status, sports participation, mental well-being, further treatment, and adverse events will be collected at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Analysis will be on an intention-to-treat basis and reported in-line with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement.Ethics and dissemination The trial was approved by the London—Bloomsbury Research Ethics Committee on 19 August 2022 (22/LO/0327) and Northern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee, NSW, Australia on the 13 March 2023 (2022/ETH01890).Trial results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, presentations at international conferences, in lay summaries and using social media as appropriate.This protocol adheres to the recommended Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) checklist.Trial registration number ISRCTN87336549.

Objective: The global impact of osteoarthritis is growing. Currently no disease modifying osteoarthritis drugs/therapies exist, increasing the need for preventative strategies. Knee injuries have a high prevalence, distinct onset, and strong independent association with post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA). Numerous groups are embarking upon research that will culminate in clinical trials to assess the effect of interventions to prevent knee PTOA despite challenges and lack of consensus about trial design in this population. Our objectives were to improve awareness of knee PTOA prevention trial design and discuss state-of-the art methods to address the unique opportunities and challenges of these studies. Design: An international interdisciplinary group developed a workshop, hosted at the 2023 Osteoarthritis Research Society International Congress. Here we summarize the workshop content and outputs, with the goal of moving the field of PTOA prevention trial design forward. Results: Workshop highlights included discussions about target population (considering risk, homogeneity, and possibility of modifying osteoarthritis outcome); target treatment (considering delivery, timing, feasibility and effectiveness); comparators (usual care, placebo), and primary symptomatic outcomes considering surrogates and the importance of knee function and symptoms other than pain to this population. Conclusions: Opportunities to test multimodal PTOA prevention interventions across preclinical models and clinical trials exist. As improving symptomatic outcomes aligns with patient and regulator priorities, co-primary symptomatic (single or aggregate/multidimensional outcome considering function and symptoms beyond pain) and structural/physiological outcomes may be appropriate for these trials. To ensure PTOA prevention trials are relevant and acceptable to all stakeholders, future research should address critical knowledge gaps and challenges.

Objectives To understand the factors influencing young athletes’ perceptions of quality of life (QOL) following an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture, prior to reconstructive surgery.Design Qualitative descriptive study using semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis of data.Setting Tertiary sports medicine clinic with patients recruited from the practices of three specialist orthopaedic surgeons.Participants Twenty athletes aged 14–25 provided consent to participate in the study and completed interviews prior to their ACL reconstruction surgery. Participants were eligible to participate if they were scheduled to undergo ACL reconstruction, were 25 years of age or younger, identified as athletes (participated in any level of organised sport), could communicate in English and agreed to be audio recorded. Participants were not eligible if they had experienced a multiligament injury or fracture.Results Young athletes shared common factors that made up their QOL; social connections and support, sport, health, and independence. However, participants’ perceptions of their current QOL were quite variable (13–95/100 on a Visual Analogue Scale). Participants who were able to reframe their injury experience by shifting focus to the positive or unaffected aspects of their lives tended to have more favourable perceptions of their QOL than participants who shifted focus to the losses associated with injury.Conclusions Young athletes who have experienced an ACL injury define their QOL based on social support, sport, health and independence. Individual processes of adaptation and cognitive reframing in response to an ACL injury may exert a greater influence on postinjury QOL than the physical ramifications of the injury itself. Understanding individual perceptions may help target potential interventions or supports to enhance athletes’ adaptation to injury.

Abstract Background The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC) is the most highly recommended patient reported outcome measure for assessing patients with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries and those undergoing ACL reconstruction (ACLR) surgery. The IKDC was developed as a unidimensional instrument for a variety of knee conditions. Structural validity, which determines how an instrument is scored, has not been definitively confirmed for the IKDC in respondents with ACL injuries, and in fact an alternative two-factor/subscale structure has been proposed in this population. The purpose of this study was to determine the most appropriate structure and scoring system for the IKDC in young active patients following ACL injury. Methods In total, 618 young patients deemed at high risk of graft rupture were randomized into the Stability 1 trial. Of the trial participants, 606 patients (98%) completed a baseline IKDC questionnaire used for this analysis. A cross sectional retrospective secondary data analysis of the Stability 1 baseline IKDC data was completed to assess the structural validity of the IKDC using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Factor analyses were used to test model fit of the intended one-factor structure, a two-factor structure, and alternative four-factor and bifactor structures (i.e., a combination of a unidimensional factor with additional specific factors) of the IKDC, in a dataset of young active ACL patients. Results The simple one-factor and two-factor structures of the IKDC displayed inadequate fit in our dataset of young ACL patients. A bifactor model provided the best fit. This model contains one general factor that is substantially associated with all items, plus four secondary, more specific content factors (symptoms, activity level, activities of daily living, and sport) with generally weaker associations to subsets of items. Although the single-factor model did not provide unambiguous support to unidimensionality of the IKDC based on fit indices, the bifactor model supports unidimensionality of the IKDC when covariance between items with similar linguistic structure, response options, or content are acknowledged. Conclusions Overall, findings of a bifactor model with evidence of a reliable general factor well defined by all items lends support to continue interpreting and scoring this instrument as unidimensional. This should be confirmed in other samples. Clinically, based on these findings, the IKDC can be represented by a single score for young active patients with ACL tears. A more nuanced interpretation would also consider secondary factors such as sport and activity level. Trial registration The Stability 1 trial for which these data were collected was registered on ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT02018354).

A stringent outcome assessment is a key aspect of establishing evidence-based clinical guidelines for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury treatment. To establish a standardized assessment of clinical outcome after ACL treatment, a consensus meeting including a multidisciplinary group of ACL experts was held at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, in June 2019. The aim was to establish a consensus on what data should be reported when conducting an ACL outcome study, what specific outcome measurements should be used, and at what follow-up time those outcomes should be assessed. The group reached consensus on 9 statements by using a modified Delphi method. In general, outcomes after ACL treatment can be divided into 4 robust categories: early adverse events, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), ACL graft failure/recurrent ligament disruption, and clinical measures of knee function and structure. A comprehensive assessment after ACL treatment should aim to provide a complete overview of the treatment result, optimally including the various aspects of outcome categories. For most research questions, a minimum follow-up of 2 years with an optimal follow-up rate of 80% is necessary to achieve a comprehensive assessment. This should include clinical examination, any sustained reinjuries, validated knee-specific PROs, and health-related quality of life questionnaires. In the midterm to long-term follow-up, the presence of osteoarthritis should be evaluated. This consensus paper provides practical guidelines for how the aforementioned entities of outcomes should be reported and suggests the preferred tools for a reliable and valid assessment of outcome after ACL treatment.

Abstract Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent joint disorder with increasing worldwide incidence. Mechanistic insights into OA pathophysiology are evolving and there are currently no disease-modifying OA drugs. An increase in protease activity is linked to progressive degradation of the cartilage in OA. Proteases also trigger inflammation through a family of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) called the Proteinase-Activated Receptors (PARs). PAR signaling can trigger pro-inflammatory responses and targeting PARs is proposed as a therapeutic approach in OA. Several enzymes can cleave the PAR N-terminus, but the endogenous protease activators of PARs in OA remain unclear. Here we characterized PAR activating enzymes in knee joint synovial fluids from OA patients and healthy donors using genetically encoded PAR biosensor expressing cells. Calcium signaling assays were performed to examine receptor activation. The class and type of enzymes cleaving the PARs was further characterized using protease inhibitors and fluorogenic substrates. We find that PAR1, PAR2 and PAR4 activating enzymes are present in knee joint synovial fluids from healthy controls and OA patients. Compared to healthy controls, PAR1 activating enzymes are elevated in OA synovial fluids while PAR4 activating enzyme levels are decreased. Using enzyme class and type selective inhibitors and fluorogenic substrates we find that multiple PAR activating enzymes are present in OA joint fluids and identify serine proteinases (thrombin and trypsin-like) and matrix metalloproteinases as the major classes of PAR activating enzymes in the OA synovial fluids. Synovial fluid driven increase in calcium signaling was significantly reduced in cells treated with PAR1 and PAR2 antagonists, but not in PAR4 antagonist treated cells. OA associated elevation of PAR1 cleavage suggests that targeting this receptor may be beneficial in the treatment of OA.

Background: In cases of complex arthroscopic knee surgery in the lateral compartment, such as performing lateral meniscus repair or transplantation, a tight lateral compartment can jeopardize the best possible care and could lead to iatrogenic cartilage injury. This technique shows a way to increase arthroscopic working space in a tight lateral compartment by performing an osteotomy of the femoral insertion of the lateral collateral ligament (LCL), utilizing a novel adjustable loop refixation technique. Indication: The femoral LCL insertion osteotomy can be performed if increased visualization and working space of the lateral compartment are needed during the complex arthroscopic knee surgery. Technique Description: After identification of the LCL femoral insertion, a 2-mm drill is passed through the LCL insertion to prepare for an anatomic reduction. The osteotomy is performed by taking a small bone plug together with the complete LCL insertion. Increased visualization and working space in the lateral compartment are obtained without damaging the intrinsic LCL structure. For reinsertion, the bone plug and proximal LCL is whipstitched with a high-strength suture and fixated to an adjustable loop Ultrabutton. The adjustable loop is shuttled through a predrilled 4.5-mm femoral tunnel and flipped on the medial side. The adjustable button is tensioned in 30° of flexion until the bone plug is anatomically reduced. Results: We present 1 patient who underwent a femoral LCL osteotomy during arthroscopic lateral meniscus allograft transplantation. The osteotomy healed without any issues, and there was no residual LCL laxity; which was confirmed with varus stress radiographs. Discussion/Conclusion: A femoral LCL insertion osteotomy can release a tight lateral compartment without damaging the intrinsic LCL structure. The adjustable loop fixation avoids the use of more traditional screw and washer fixation techniques, which tend to be more prominent and have the potential to back out. An osteotomy is more invasive than the “pie-crusting” technique of the medial collateral ligament for a tight medial compartment. However, it is required due to the poor intrinsic healing capacity of the LCL. Care should be taken to anatomically reduce the bone plug to avoid iatrogenic creation of LCL laxity. Patient Consent Disclosure Statement: The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication.

Context: The long duration and high cost of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) rehabilitation can pose barriers to completing rehabilitation, the latter stages of which progress to demanding sport-specific exercises critical for a safe return to sport. A staged approach shifting in-person physiotherapy sessions to later months of recovery may ensure patients undergo the sport-specific portion of ACLR rehabilitation. Design/Objective: To compare postoperative outcomes of knee function in patients participating in a staged ACLR physiotherapy program to patients participating in usual care physiotherapy through a randomized controlled trial. Methods: One hundred sixty-two patients were randomized to participate in staged (n = 80) or usual care physiotherapy (n = 82) following ACLR and assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 6 months. The staged group completed the ACLR rehabilitation protocol at home for the first 3 months, followed by usual care in- person sessions. The usual care group completed in-person sessions for their entire rehabilitation. Outcome measures included the Lower Extremity Functional Scale, International Knee Documentation Committee Questionnaire, pain, range of motion, strength, and hop testing. Results: There were no statistically significant between-group differences in measures of knee function at 6 months postoperative. Patients in the usual care group reported significantly higher International Knee Documentation Committee scores at 3 months postoperative (mean difference = 5.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.3 to 10.4; P = .01). Conclusion: A staged approach to ACLR rehabilitation does not appear to impede knee function at 6 months postoperative but may result in worse patient reported outcomes at early follow-ups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Knee Numeric-Entity Evaluation Score (KNEES-ACL) is a 41-item condition-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) that was developed for patients with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) deficiency and patients after ACL reconstruction. This measure is intended to be used for longitudinal clinical studies. The KNEES-ACL has demonstrated face and content validity and superior responsiveness compared with other PROMs commonly used in patients with an ACL injury. However, this PROM was developed in Danish and has not been appropriately translated and culturally adapted into North American English. Purpose: To translate and culturally adapt the KNEES-ACL from Danish to North American English. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Translation from Danish to English and cultural adaptation to a North American context were performed according to the dual panel method. First, the Danish KNEES-ACL was translated by a bilingual panel, which provided multiple English wording options for each item. Second, an English lay panel focus group was formed to determine the wording for each item that best reflected everyday spoken language. Finally, individual think-aloud cognitive interviews were conducted with patients after an ACL injury to evaluate the relevance, comprehensiveness, and comprehensibility of the PROM content and questions. Repeated modifications and testing were performed until a final English version of the KNEES-ACL was constructed. Results: Participants in the lay panel focus group were able to reach unanimous decisions for each of the 41 items. Further changes to 17 items were made after 8 think-aloud interviews with patients with ACL injuries at various time points to ensure that items were relevant and being interpreted consistently among different types of patients. The final KNEES-ACL consisted of 6 domains: Problems with Daily Activities, Mental Impact, Stability, Strength and Control, Pain, and Sport and Physical Activity. Conclusion: The English KNEES-ACL for patients with ACL injuries has undergone appropriate translation and cultural adaptation using established dual panel and cognitive interviewing methods in the population of interest. The psychometric properties of the English KNEES-ACL will likely mirror those established with the Danish version. However, direct validation of the psychometric properties of the English version would be beneficial before widespread use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Several commonly used procedures for knee osteoarthritis (OA) are not supported by evidence-based guidelines. The objective of this study was to identify the proportion of patients who underwent knee arthroscopy or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the timing of these procedures before total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using administrative data sets from Ontario, Canada. We identified the proportion of patients who underwent knee arthroscopy in the previous 10 years or an MRI in the 3 years before their primary TKA. We also evaluated the rate of arthroscopies by diagnosis. We report the timing of each outcome in relation to the TKA, rates by geographical area, and differences in rates over time. Results: We included 142275 patients, of whom 36379 (25.57%) underwent knee arthroscopy (median time 2.8 [interquartile range (IQR) 1.1-6.0] years); 22% of those were within 1 year of TKA and 52% were within 3 years. The rates of arthroscopies for a diagnosis of osteoarthritis (OA) steadily decreased, while those for meniscal-related diagnoses increased over the study period (p < 0.0001). There was significant variation by region. Of the cohort, 23.2% (n = 32 989) had an MRI before their TKA, with rates significantly increasing over time (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: A substantial proportion of patients with knee OA received diagnostic and therapeutic interventions before TKA that are contrary to clinical practice guidelines. Contexte : Plusieurs interventions diagnostiques ou thérapeutiques d'usage courant pour l'arthrose du genou ne s'appuient sur aucune ligne directrice fondée sur des données probantes. L'objectif de cette étude était d'établir la proportion de patients qui ont subi une arthroscopie ou une épreuve d'imagerie par résonnance magnétique (IRM), et l'intervalle entre ces interventions et l'arthroplastie pour prothèse totale du genou (PTG). Méthodes : Nous avons procédé à une étude de cohorte rétrospective à partir de données administratives de population en Ontario, au Canada. Nous avons établi la proportion de patients soumis à une arthroscopie du genou dans les 10 années ou une IRM dans les 3 années précédant une PTG primaire. Nous avons aussi calculé le taux d'arthroscopies par diagnostic. Nous faisons état du moment de chacune par rapport à la PTG, des taux par région, et les différences de taux avec le temps. Résultats : Nous avons inclus 142 275 patients, dont 36 379 (25,57%) ont subi une arthroscopie du genou (intervalle médian 2,8 ans [intervalle interquartile (IIQ) 1,1-6,0]); 22% d'entre eux ont reçu leur PTG dans l'année suivante et 52% dans les 3 années suivantes. Les taux d'arthroscopies pour un diagnostic d'arthrose ont régulièrement diminué, tandis que les diagnostics liés à des problèmes de ménisque ont augmenté pendant la période de l'étude (p < 0,0001). On a noté une variation significative d'une région à l'autre. Dans cette cohorte, 23,2% des patients (n = 32 989) avaient subi une IRM avant leur PTG, avec des taux significativement croissants avec le temps (p < 0,0001). Conclusion : Dans une proportion substantielle, les patients souffrant d'arthrose du genou ont subi des interventions diagnostiques et thérapeutiques pré-PTG qui sont contraires aux lignes directrices de pratique clinique., Osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee is one of the most common chronic health conditions and is a leading contributor to health care service use. (1-3) The disease typically involves slow [...]