Influence of leg axis alignment on MRI T2* mapping of the knee in young professional soccer players.

BACKGROUND: Investigation of the association between leg axis alignment and biochemical MRI in young professional soccer players in order to identify a potential influence of the leg axis on cartilage regions at risk. METHODS: Sixteen professional soccer players (21 ± 3 years) underwent static and dynamic leg axis analysis via radiation free DIERS formetric 4 D as well as 3-T MRI examination of both knees. Quantitative T2* mapping of the knee cartilage was performed and T2* values were evaluated as 144 regions of interest. Subgroup analysis was performed in players with severe varus alignment (> 6°). RESULTS: Analysis of the leg axis geometry revealed a mean static alignment of 6.6° ± 2.5 varus and a mean dynamic alignment of 5.1° ± 2.6 varus. Quantitative T2* mapping showed significantly increased T2* values in the superficial cartilage layer compared to the deeper region (p < 0.001) as well as a significant increase in relaxation times in the femoral cartilage from anterior to intermediate to posterior (p < 0.001). Combination of both methods revealed a significant correlation for the degree of varus alignment and the femoral, posterior, deep region of the medial knee compartment (r = 0.4; p = 0.03). If severe varus alignment was present this region showed a significant increase in relaxation time compared to players with a less pronounced leg axis deviation (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that varus alignment in young soccer players is associated with elevated T2* relaxation times in the deep cartilage layer of the medial, posterior, femoral compartment and might therefore be a contributing factor in the early pathogenesis of manifest cartilage lesions. Therefore, these findings should be considered in the development of preventive training programs.

Acromioclavicular joint suture button repair leads to coracoclavicular tunnel widening.

PURPOSE: Biomechanical evaluation of three different suture button devices used in acromioclavicular joint repair and analysis of their effect on post-testing tunnel widening. METHODS: Eighteen human shoulder girdles were assigned into three groups with a similar mean bone mineral density. Three different single-tunnel acromioclavicular repair devices were tested: (1) AC TightRope® with FiberWire; (2) AC Dog Bone™ Button with FiberTape; (3) Low Profile AC Repair System. Biomechanical testing was performed simulating the complex movement of the distal clavicle as follows. A vertical load of 80 N was applied continuously. The rotation of the clavicle about its long axis was set at 10° anterior and 30° posterior for 2500 cycles at 0.25 Hz. The horizontal translation of the clavicle was set at 6 mm medial and 6 mm lateral for 10,000 cycles at 1 Hz. The coracoclavicular distance was measured before and after testing. After testing, each sample underwent micro-CT analysis. Following 3D reconstruction, the area of the bone tunnels was measured at five defined cross sections. RESULTS: In TightRope® and Dog Bone™ groups, all samples completed testing, whereas in the Low Profile group, three out of six samples showed system failure. The mean absolute difference of coracoclavicular distance after testing was significantly greater in the Low Profile group compared to TightRope® and Dog Bone™ groups (4.3 ± 1.3 mm vs 1.9 ± 0.7 mm vs 1.9 ± 0.8 mm; p = 0.001). Micro-CT analysis of the specimens demonstrated significant tunnel widening in the inferior clavicular and superior coracoid regions in all three groups (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Significant tunnel widening can be observed for all devices and is primarily found in the inferior parts of the clavicle and superior parts of the coracoid. The Low Profile AC Repair System showed inferior biomechanical properties compared to the AC TightRope® and AC Dog Bone™ devices. Therefore, clinicians should carefully select the type of acromioclavicular repair device used and need to consider tunnel widening as a complication.

Preoperative joint line convergence angle correction is a key factor in optimising accuracy in varus knee correction osteotomy.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to identify and prevent preoperative factors that can be influenced in preoperative planning to reduce postoperative malcorrections. METHODS: The method used in this study was a retrospective two-centre analysis of 78 pre and postoperative fully weight-bearing radiographs of patients who underwent valgus osteotomy correction due to symptomatic medial compartment osteoarthritis. A computer software (TraumaCad®) was used to aim for an intersection point of the mechanical tibiofemoral axis (mTFA) with the tibia plateau at 55-60% (medial = 0%, lateral = 100%). Postoperative divergence ± 5% of this point was defined as over- and undercorrection. Preoperative joint geometry factors were correlated with postoperative malcorrection. Planning was conducted using the established method described by Miniaci (Group A) and with additional correction of the joint line convergence angle (JLCA) using the formula JLCA-2/2 (Group B). Additionally, in a small clinical case series, planning was conducted with JLCA correction. Statistical analysis was performed using (multiple) linear regression analysis and analysis of variance (ANOVA) with p < 0.05 considered significant. RESULTS: In 78 analysed cases, postoperative malcorrection was detected in 37.2% (5.1% undercorrection, 32.1% overcorrection). Linear regression analysis revealed preoperative body mass index (BMI, p = 0.04), JLCA (p = 0.0001), and osteotomy level divergence (p = 0.0005) as factors correlated with overcorrection. In a multiple regression analysis, JLCA and osteotomy level divergence remained significant factors. Preoperative JLCA correction reduced the planned osteotomy gap (A 9.7 ± 2.8 mm vs B 8.3 ± 2.4 mm; p > 0.05) and postoperative medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA: A 94.3 ± 2.1° vs B 92.3 ± 1.5°; p < .05) in patients with preoperative JLCA ≥ 4°. The results were validated using a virtual postoperative correction of cases with overcorrection. A case series (n = 8) with a preoperative JLCA > 4 revealed a postoperative accuracy using the JLCA correction of 3.4 ± 1.9%. CONCLUSION: Preoperative JLCA ≥ 4° and tibial osteotomy level divergence were identified as risk factors for postoperative overcorrection. Preoperative JLCA correction using the formula JLCA-2/2 is proposed to better control ideal postoperative correction and reduce MPTA. The intraoperatively realised osteotomy level should be precisely in accordance with preoperative planning. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, cross-sectional study.