Prospective Comparison of Postoperative Pain and Opioid Consumption Between Primary Repair and Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament.

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) is associated with postoperative pain and necessitates using perioperative nerve blocks and multimodal analgesic plans. Purpose: To assess postoperative pain and daily opioid use after ACL repair versus ACLR and to assess whether ACL repair could be performed successfully without using long-acting nerve blocks. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: All eligible patients who underwent ACL surgery between 2019 and 2022 were prospectively enrolled. Patients were treated with primary repair if proximal tears with sufficient tissue quality were present; otherwise, they underwent single-bundle ACLR with either hamstring tendon or quadriceps tendon autograft. The patients were divided into 3 groups: ACLR with adductor canal nerve block (up to 20 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine with 2 mg dexamethasone), primary repair with nerve block, and primary repair without nerve block. Pain visual analog scale and number of opioids used were recorded during the first 14 postoperative days (PODs). Furthermore, patients completed the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) survey, and range of motion was assessed. Group differences were compared using Mann-Whitney U test and chi-square test. Results: Seventy-eight patients were included: 30 (39%) underwent ACLR, 19 (24%) ACL repair with nerve block, and 29 (37%) ACL repair without nerve block. Overall, the ACL repair group used significantly fewer opioids than the ACLR group on POD 1 (1 vs 3, P = .027) and POD 2 (1 vs 3, P = .014) while also using fewer opioids in total (3 vs 8, P = .038). This difference was even more marked when only analyzing those patients who received postoperative nerve blocks (1 vs 8, P = .029). Repair patients had significantly higher QoR-15 scores throughout the first postoperative week, and they had greater range of motion (all P < .05). There were no significant differences in pain scores, opioid usage, or QoR-15 scores between patients who underwent repair with versus without nerve block. Conclusion: The ACL repair group experienced less postoperative pain during the first 2 weeks after surgery and used significantly fewer opioids than the ACLR group. Furthermore, they had improved knee function and higher recovery quality than patients who underwent ACLR during the initial postoperative period. Postoperative nerve blocks may not be necessary after ACL repair.

Acute Percutaneous Repair of Medial Collateral Ligament With Suture Augmentation in the Multiligamentous Injured Knee Results in Good Stability and Low Rates of Postoperative Stiffness.

Purpose: To assess the clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of acute superficial medial collateral ligament (sMCL) repair with suture augmentation (SA) in the setting of a multiligamentous injured knees (MLIKs) at 2-year follow-up. Methods: A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with MLIK with grade III sMCL injuries who underwent acute (<6 weeks) sMCL repair with SA was conducted. Clinical follow-up was performed at minimum 1-year postoperatively, and PROMs were collected at the latest follow-up (minimum 2 years' postoperatively). Continuous variables were reported in median with interquartile range (IQR). Results: A total of 20 patients (41.4 [28.5-47.9] years of age) with grade III sMCL injury and additional injury to 1 cruciate ligament (KDI-M; n = 13) or bicruciate (KDIII-M; n = 7) were enrolled with a median follow-up of 4.3 (3.6-5.2) years. In total, 90% (n = 18) of patients with MLIK treated with acute sMCL repair and early range of motion rehabilitation protocol demonstrated negative valgus laxity stress testing in 0 and 30° flexion and low reoperation rates (n = 1, 5%) due to stiffness. In addition, good-to-excellent subjective outcomes were reported at final follow-up: median International Knee Documentation Committee 82.2 (78.7-90.8), Lysholm 95.0 (90.0-100.0), modified Cincinnati Score 89.0 (83.3-96.0), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation 90.0 (83.8-95.0), Forgotten Joint Score 79.2 (62.5-91.7), Tegner 5.0 (IQR 4.0-6.0), and ACL-Return to Sport after Injury Scale 78.3 (IQR 66.7-90.0). Conclusions: In this study, 20 heterogenous patients with MLIKs treated with acute percutaneous sMCL repair with SA had excellent stability, low rates of postoperative stiffness, and good-to-excellent PROMs at short-term follow-up. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Arthroscopic Primary Repair of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Using Ring Suture Attached to Adjustable Loop Device.

Posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injuries occur most often in the setting of a multiligamentous injured knee and are frequently the result of high-energy trauma. For severe and multiligamentous PCL injuries, surgical intervention is recommended. Although PCL reconstruction has traditionally been the standard treatment, arthroscopic primary PCL repair has been revisited over the past few years for proximal tears with sufficient tissue quality. Current PCL repair techniques report two technical issues: the risk of suture abrasion/laceration during the stitching process, and the inability to retension the ligament after fixation with either suture anchors or ligament buttons. In this technical note, we describe the surgical technique of arthroscopic primary repair of proximal PCL tears using a looping ring suture device (FiberRing), combined with an adjustable loop cortical fixation device (ACL Repair TightRope). The goals of this technique are to offer a minimally invasive option to preserve the native PCL and to avoid the observed shortcomings of other arthroscopic primary repair techniques.

Rare Fracture Knee Dislocation Treated with Ligament Repair and Novel Arcuate Fracture Repair Technique: A Case Report.

CASE: A 57-year-old man presented with a left knee dislocation after a motor vehicle collision. Clinical and imaging evaluation demonstrated disruption of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL), posterior cruciate ligament (PCL), anterolateral ligament (ALL), and posterolateral corner (PLC). The patient underwent acute, single-stage arthroscopic primary ACL and PCL repair, with arcuate fracture fixation using a novel technique. At 4 years postoperatively, he continues to do well subjectively with minimal clinical laxity. CONCLUSION: Acute, single-stage arthroscopic primary ligamentous repair is a viable option for high-grade multiligamentous knee dislocations and may be combined with our novel technique for arcuate fracture fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Case Report.

Treating Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Medial Collateral Ligament Injuries Operatively in the Acute Setting Is Potentially Advantageous.

Combined injury of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and medial collateral ligament (MCL) remains among the most common knee injury patterns in orthopaedics. Optimal treatment of grade III MCL injuries is still debated, especially when combined with ACL injury. Most patients with these severe injuries are treated conservatively for at least 6 weeks to allow for MCL healing, followed by delayed ACL reconstruction. Although acute treatment of the MCL was common in the 1970s, postoperative stiffness was frequently reported. Moreover, studies of such treatment failed to show clinical benefits of surgical over conservative treatment, and the MCL exhibited intrinsic healing capacity, leading to the consensus that all MCL injuries are treated conservatively. The current delayed treatment algorithm for ACL-MCL injuries has several disadvantages. First, MCL healing may be incomplete, resulting in residual valgus laxity that places the ACL graft at greater risk of failure. Second, delayed treatment lengthens the overall rehabilitation period, thereby prolonging the presence of atrophy and delaying return to preinjury activity levels. Third, the initial healing period leaves the knee unstable for longer and risks further intra-articular damage. Acute simultaneous surgical treatment of both ligaments has the potential to avoid these shortcomings. This article will review the evolution of treatment of ACL-MCL injuries and explain how it shifted toward the current treatment algorithm. We will (1) discuss why the consensus shifted, (2) discuss the shortcomings of the current treatment plan, (3) discuss the potential advantages of acute simultaneous treatment, and (4) present an overview of the available literature.

Open Versus Arthroscopic Surgical Management for Recalcitrant Trochanteric Bursitis: A Systematic Review.

Background: While excision of the trochanteric bursae to treat lateral hip pain has increased in popularity, no comparison exists between the surgical outcomes and complications of the open and arthroscopic techniques involving trochanteric bursectomy. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacies and complication rates of arthroscopic and open techniques for procedures involving trochanteric bursectomy. Methods: The terms "trochanteric," "bursectomy," "arthroscopic," "open," "outcomes," and "hip" were searched in five electronic databases. Fifteen studies from 120 initial results were included. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO), pain, satisfaction, and complications were included for analysis. Results: Five hundred-two hips in 474 total patients (77.7% female) were included in this study. The average age was 54. The fourteen distinct PRO scores that were reported by the included studies improved significantly from baseline to final mean follow-up (12-70.8 months for open; 12-42 months for arthroscopic) for both approaches, demonstrating statistically significant patient benefit in a variety of hip arthroscopy settings (P > 0.05). The complication rates of all procedures ranged from 0%-33% and failure to improve pain ranged from 0%-8%. Patient satisfaction with surgery was high at 95% and 82% reported a willingness to undergo the same surgery again. No significant mean differences were found between the open and arthroscopic techniques. Conclusion: The open and arthroscopic approaches for trochanteric bursectomy are both safe and effective procedures in treating refractory lateral hip pain. No significant differences in PROs, pain, total complications, severity of complications, and total failures were seen between technique outcomes.Level of Evidence: IV.