No correction angle loss with stable plates in open-wedge high tibial osteotomy.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological results of the wedge plate and locking plate systems in open-wedge high tibial osteotomy. METHODS: Between 2007 and 2010, the wedge plate was used as the fixation device for osteotomy to treat a total of 67 patients; from 2009 to 2010, the locking plate was used in 19 patients. Matching for gender, age, body mass index (BMI), and articular cartilage status, 19 pairs of wedge plate and locking plate cases were enrolled in a 1:1 retrospective matched-pair analysis. Clinical data were collected and scored using the visual analogue scale and the International Knee Documentation subjective score. Additionally, pre-operative, immediate post-operative, and last follow-up radiographs were obtained to assess changes in the hip-knee-ankle (H-K-A) angle and posterior tibial slope. RESULTS: No significant differences in gender, age, BMI, follow-up period, and articular cartilage status were found between the groups. Although the initial correction of the H-K-A angles, 8.9° ± 1.9° and 9.4° ± 4.2° for the wedge plate and locking plate groups, respectively, was not significantly different, a significant difference (P = 0.046) in the final correction angles, 7.2° ± 2.1° and 9.4° ± 4.4°, respectively, was found. The increase in the posterior tibial slope, 0.5° ± 2.0° and 3.2° ± 2.6°, for the wedge plate and locking plate groups, respectively, was significantly different (P = 0.010). When classified according to the correction angle, we found that when the initial correction angle exceeded 10.0°, an average correction loss of 2.9° ± 0.5° was observed in the wedge plate group, whereas an average increase in the posterior tibial slope of 5.8° ± 1.6° was evident for the locking plate group. CONCLUSIONS: At 2 years post-operatively, the final correction angles of the wedge and the locking plate groups differed significantly, and the wedge plate group had a smaller increase in the posterior tibial slope than the locking plate group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective comparative study, Level III.

Evaluation of femoral tunnel positioning using 3-dimensional computed tomography and radiographs after single bundle anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with modified transtibial technique.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to report a modified transtibial technique to approach the center of anatomical femoral footprint in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and to investigate the accurate femoral tunnel position with 3-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) and radiography after reconstruction. METHODS: From December 2010 to October 2011, we evaluated 98 patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction using a modified transtibial technique to approach the center of anatomical femoral footprint in single bundle ACL reconstruction with hamstring autograft. Their femoral tunnel positions were investigated with 3D-CT and radiography postoperatively. Femoral tunnel angle was measured on the postoperative anteroposterior (AP) radiograph and the center of the femoral tunnel aperture on the lateral femoral condyle was assessed with 3D-CT according to the quadrant method by two orthopedic surgeons. RESULTS: According to the quadrant method with 3D-CT, the femoral tunnel was measured at a mean of 32.94% ± 5.16% from the proximal condylar surface (parallel to the Blumensaat line) and 41.89% ± 5.58% from the notch roof (perpendicular to the Blumensaat line) with good interobserver (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC], 0.766 and 0.793, respectively) and intraobserver reliability (ICC, 0.875 and 0.893, respectively). According to the radiographic measurement on the AP view, the femoral tunnel angles averaged 50.43° ± 7.04° (ICC, 0.783 and 0.911, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our modified transtibial technique is anticipated to provide more anatomical placement of the femoral tunnel during ACL reconstruction than the former traditional transtibial techniques.

The tips and pitfalls of meniscus allograft transplantation.

When faced with an irrepairable meniscus or a patient who has had a total or subtotal meniscectomy, meniscus allograft transplantation (MAT) is the preferred modality to restore biomechanical function of the meniscus. The indications for meniscus allograft transplantation are yet to be established. However, currently, MAT has previously been indicated for symptomatic patients who have mild or early osteoarthritis, are younger than 50 years of age, and present with an Outerbridge grade II or lower. The short- to intermediate-term results confirmed noteworthy clinical improvements and consistent objective findings. On the other hand, the successful outcome would be reduced by various complications. Therefore, long-term observation required to evaluate the longevity of these results. The purpose of this article is to review the current research of concerns on the results of MAT, and to describe the technical tips and pitfalls so as to successful clinical results.