Anatomic reconstruction of the posteromedial corner of the knee: The Versailles technique.

INTRODUCTION: Multiligament knee injury with posteromedial laxity is serious and usually requires surgery. Reconstruction is preferable to repair. The main aim of the present study was to report clinical results and laximetry for an original posteromedial corner (PMC) allograft reconstruction technique known as The Versailles Technique. The secondary aim was to determine prognostic factors for surgery. The study hypothesis was that anatomic PMC reconstruction by tendon allograft provides satisfactory medium-term clinical and laximetric results. METHODS: A retrospective study assessed postoperative clinical and laximetric results after PMC allograft reconstruction at a minimum 12 months' follow-up. Laxity was assessed on comparative bilateral stress X-rays, and functional results on the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, the Lysholm score and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were included between 2013 and 2019. Mean follow-up was 27.4±9 months. Mean subjective IKDC score was 69.21±17.36, mean Lysholm score 77.78±14.98 and mean KOOS 66.44±18.52. OBJECTIVE: IKDC results were 77% grade A, 22% grade B, and 0% grade C or D. Mean medial differential laxity in forced varus was 0.83±1.26mm. Mean subjective IKDC scores were poorer in Schenck KD-III than KD-I (p=0.03). Functional results were comparable with acute and with chronic laxity. Age correlated inversely with median KOOS (p=0.009). There was no correlation between postoperative radiologic laxity in forced varus and functional results. DISCUSSION: Versailles anatomic PMC allograft reconstruction for acute or chronic posteromedial knee laxity showed medium-term efficacy in restoring good objective and subjective stability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; retrospective observational study.

Comparison of the functional outcomes after treatment of periprosthetic hip fractures with femoral stem loosening: Locking plate fixation with or without femoral stem revision.

INTRODUCTION: Periprosthetic fractures have become one of the main reasons for revision of total hip arthroplasty, with the treatment strategy guided by the Vancouver and SOFCOT classification systems. The main objective of this work was to compare the functional outcomes and mortality rate in patients who suffered a periprosthetic hip fracture with femoral stem loosening and who were treated either by internal fixation with locking plate only, or in combination with revision of the existing femoral stem with a cemented stem. The secondary objective was to compare the blood loss, procedure duration, length of hospital stay, living arrangements, time to weight bearing and major complications between these two treatment strategies. The starting hypothesis was that there is no difference in the functional outcomes between these two groups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single center, retrospective study of patients treated between 2013 and 2019. Thirty-six patients (54%) underwent femoral stem revision (FSR group) and 31 patients (46%) were treated by locking plate fixation only (ORIF group). In this population, 19 of the patients had been residing at a nursing home before the surgical treatment: 12 (33%) in the FSR group and 7 (23%) in the ORIF group (p=0.33). The mean preoperative Parker score was 7.03 (± 1.48) in the FSR group versus 5.19 (± 1.92) in the ORIF group. The functional outcomes at the final review were evaluated using the Parker score, HHS (Harris Hip score), WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Arthritis Index) and Oxford score. Fracture healing was determined on radiographs centered over the hip joint with the entire femur visible on AP and lateral views. All patients were reviewed at a minimum of 1 year for clinical and radiological assessments. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 28 months [12-85], the Oxford score was 40.4 (± 10.6) in the FSR group versus 37.1 (± 13.5) in the ORIF group (p=0.34), WOMAC of 45.5 (± 26.9) versus 50.5 (± 32.4) (p=0.56), and HHS of 62.7 (± 25.5) versus 60.3 (± 28.6) (p=0.79). The Parker score at the final assessment was 5.14 (± 1.96) in the FSR group versus 4.64 (± 2.17) in the ORIF group (p=0.33). In the FSR group, 10 patients were at a nursing home (34%), 6 of whom were not there initially, versus 6 in the ORIF group (43%), 5 of whom were not there initially (p=0.59). The mean operating time was 152±41.4 minutes (minimum: 85; maximum: 254) in the FSR group versus 89.2 (± 44.1) minutes (minimum: 39; maximum: 280) in the ORIF group (p<0.001). Resumption of full weight bearing occurred at 6 weeks in 21 patients (58%) in the FSR group versus 14 patients (47%) in the ORIF group (p=0.023). There were 5 major complications (14%) in the FSR group versus 7 (23%) in the ORIF group (p=0.35). Among the reviewed patients, the union rate was 86% on the latest radiographs in the FSR group versus 78% in the ORIF group. DISCUSSION: There was no statistically significant difference between groups in the various functional scores, confirming our study hypothesis. Internal fixation with a locking plate appears to be an acceptable solution for treating periprosthetic hip fractures in which the femoral stem has loosened. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, comparative retrospective study.

Coronal knee alignment measurements differ on long-standing radiographs vs. by navigation.

BACKGROUND: The long-standing radiograph (LSR) is the reference tool for assessing knee alignment after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, its value is debatable, as many factors can influence measurement accuracy. Computer-assisted surgery (CAS) provides accurate measurements. Few studies have compared LSR and computer-assisted measurements of knee alignment. The objective of this study was to compare hip-knee-ankle (HKA) angle values obtained before and after TKA on LSRs to those obtained during CAS. HYPOTHESIS: The HKA angle values measured on LSRs before and after surgery are identical to those measured during CAS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The HKA angles of 126 knees were measured on bipedal full-weight-bearing LSRs obtained before and 3 months after TKA. The results were compared to the values obtained during CAS. RESULTS: Before surgery, the standard deviation was 2.672, with limits of agreement of {-5.391; + 5.082}. The intra-class coefficients were good for the overall measurements (0.9), good for detecting>10° varus (0.89), fair for<10° varus and valgus (0.66 and 0.71, respectively), poor for>10° valgus (0.43) and poor for normal alignment (0). Post-operatively, the standard deviation was 3.113, with limits of agreement of {-6.426; +5.776}. The intra-class coefficient was poor for the overall measurements (0.20), negative for normal alignment (-0.05) and<10° valgus (-0.05), and positive for<10° varus (0.017) and for>10° varus and valgus (0.33). CONCLUSION: Before TKA, the LSR overestimates the deformity compared to CAS. After surgery, the two methods are not comparable. These findings underline the relevance of routinely obtaining LSRs and for using LSR results to estimate costs for healthcare insurance reimbursement purposes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective observational cohort study.