Secondary surgeries 20 years after surgical and non-surgical treatment of ACL rupture: A population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Studies with less than 10 years of follow-up have demonstrated no difference between surgical and non-surgical treatment after an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture; however, long-term effects remain unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the risk of long-term secondary surgical procedures after primary surgical and non-surgical treatment for ACL ruptures. METHODS: Patients aged 18-35, registered in the Danish National Patient Registry with an ACL rupture between January 1, 1996 and December 31, 2000 with a minimum of 20 years follow-up were included. The surgically treated group was defined as receiving an ACL reconstruction within 1 year after diagnosis. Major secondary surgical procedures were defined as subsequent ACL surgeries (reconstruction/revision), arthroplasty, deep infection, arthrodesis, or amputation. Minor secondary surgical procedures were defined as meniscal surgery, synovectomy, and manipulation under anesthesia (MUA). Multivariate regression analysis was performed to assess relative risk (RR), adjusted for age and sex. The results are reported with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: 7,539 patients had an ACL rupture; 1,970 patients were surgically treated. In the surgically treated group, 5.9% of patients underwent major secondary surgeries; this was 6.1% in the non-surgically treated group, yielding an adjusted RR of 1.05 (0.85;1.30). There were 43.9% minor secondary surgeries in the surgically treated group and 49.1% in the non-surgically treated group, yielding an adjusted RR of 1.29 (1.20;1.39). CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences in the rate of major secondary surgical procedures between the groups, the non-surgical group was associated with a higher risk of minor secondary surgeries.

Effect of Exercise Training on Fat Loss-Energetic Perspectives and the Role of Improved Adipose Tissue Function and Body Fat Distribution.

In obesity, excessive abdominal fat, especially the accumulation of visceral adipose tissue (VAT), increases the risk of metabolic disorders, such as type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), cardiovascular disease, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Excessive abdominal fat is associated with adipose tissue dysfunction, leading to systemic low-grade inflammation, fat overflow, ectopic lipid deposition, and reduced insulin sensitivity. Physical activity is recommended for primary prevention and treatment of obesity, T2DM, and related disorders. Achieving a stable reduction in body weight with exercise training alone has not shown promising effects on a population level. Because fat has a high energy content, a large amount of exercise training is required to achieve weight loss. However, even when there is no weight loss, exercise training is an effective method of improving body composition (increased muscle mass and reduced fat) as well as increasing insulin sensitivity and cardiorespiratory fitness. Compared with traditional low-to-moderate-intensity continuous endurance training, high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and sprint interval training (SIT) are more time-efficient as exercise regimens and produce comparable results in reducing total fat mass, as well as improving cardiorespiratory fitness and insulin sensitivity. During high-intensity exercise, carbohydrates are the main source of energy, whereas, with low-intensity exercise, fat becomes the predominant energy source. These observations imply that HIIT and SIT can reduce fat mass during bouts of exercise despite being associated with lower levels of fat oxidation. In this review, we explore the effects of different types of exercise training on energy expenditure and substrate oxidation during physical activity, and discuss the potential effects of exercise training on adipose tissue function and body fat distribution.

Does surgery reduce knee osteoarthritis, meniscal injury and subsequent complications compared with non-surgery after ACL rupture with at least 10 years follow-up? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We compared long-term follow-up from surgical versus non-surgical treatment of ACL rupture regarding radiographic knee osteoarthritis (OA), secondary surgery, laxity and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library databases. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies directly comparing the minimally invasive surgical (arthroscopy or miniarthrotomy) and non-surgical treatment of ACL rupture with at least 10 years of follow-up in adult patients were included. RESULTS: Five studies met the eligibility criteria. A meta-analysis revealed a higher risk of radiographic knee OA and a lower risk of secondary meniscal surgery for patients in the surgical group. The risk of graft rupture/secondary ACL revision and secondary ACL reconstruction was equal in the surgical and non-surgical groups. Knee laxity was lower among patients in the surgical group in four studies. No difference was found in the PROMs (ie, International Knee Documentation Committee, Tegner, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome, and Lysholm scores). CONCLUSION: The risk of radiographic knee OA was higher, but the risk of secondary meniscal injury was lower 10 years after surgical treatment of ACL rupture. The risk of graft rupture/secondary ACL revision or secondary reconstruction was unrelated to treatment type. The degree of knee laxity was reduced after surgical treatment in comparison with non-surgical treatment, while PROMs were similar. However, due to the methodological challenges highlighted in this systematic review, these findings must be interpreted with caution. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019119468.