Physeal-sparing ACL reconstruction provides better knee laxity restoration but similar clinical outcomes to partial transphyseal and complete transphyseal approaches in the pediatric population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate complete transphyseal (CTP), partial transphyseal (PTP), and physeal-sparing (PS) techniques for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. METHODS: A systematic literature search of the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus literature databases was performed on 10.05.2021. All human studies evaluating the outcomes of CTP, PTP, and PS techniques were included. The influence of the selected approach was evaluated in terms of rates of retears, return to previous level of sport competition, IKDC subjective and objective scores, Lysholm score, rate of normal Lachman and pivot-shift tests, limb length discrepancy, and hip-knee angle (HKA) deviation. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed following the Downs and Black checklist. RESULTS: Forty-nine out of 425 retrieved studies (3260 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The results of the meta-analysis comparing CTP, PTP, and PS approaches for ACL reconstruction in the under 20-year-old population showed a significant difference in terms of differential laxity (CTP 1.98 mm, PTP 1.69 mm, PS 0.22 mm, p < 0.001). No significant differences were seen in terms of growth malalignment, rate of normal Lachman and pivot-shift tests, and rate of normal/quasi-normal IKDC objective score. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis found overall similar results with the three ACL reconstruction approaches. The PS technique showed better results in terms of knee laxity than the PTP and CTP approaches, but this did not lead to a significant difference in terms of subjective and objective scores. No clear superiority of one technique over the others was found with respect to re-ruptures, growth disturbances, and axial deviations. While the argument for avoiding growth malalignment does not seem to be a crucial point, the PS technique should be the preferred approach in a young population to ensure knee laxity restoration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction versus Nonoperative Treatment: Better Function and Less Secondary Meniscectomies But No Difference in Knee Osteoarthritis-A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The impact of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction on knee osteoarthritis (OA) is still unclear. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to compare surgical treatment versus nonoperative management of ACL tears to assess the impact of these approaches on knee OA development at a 5 and 10 years of follow-up. DESIGN: A meta-analysis was performed after a systematic literature search (May 2021) was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Both randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies with more than 5 years of follow-up were selected. Influence of the treatment was assessed in terms of knee OA development, subjective and objective clinical results, activity level, and risk of further surgeries. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed following the Cochrane guidelines. RESULTS: Twelve studies matched the inclusion criteria, for a total of 1,004 patients. Level of evidence was rated low to very low. No difference was documented in terms of knee OA development, Tegner score, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Lysholm scores. A significant difference favoring the surgical treatment in comparison with a nonsurgical approach was observed in terms of objective IKDC score (P = 0.03) and risk of secondary meniscectomy (P < 0.0001). The level of evidence was considered very low for subjective IKDC, low for knee OA development, objective IKDC, number of secondary meniscectomies, and Lysholm score, and moderate for post-op Tegner score. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis did not support an advantage of ACL reconstruction in terms of OA prevention in comparison with a nonoperative treatment. Moreover, no differences were reported for subjective results and activity level at 5 and 10 years of follow-up. On the contrary, patients who underwent surgical treatment of their ACL tear presented important clinical findings in terms of better objective knee function and a lower rate of secondary meniscectomies when compared with conservatively managed patents.Protocol Registration: CRD420191156483 (PROSPERO).

Operative Versus Nonoperative Management for Distal Biceps Brachii Tendon Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Both nonoperative and operative treatments have been proposed to manage distal biceps brachii tendon avulsions. However, the advantages and disadvantages of these approaches have not been properly quantified. PURPOSE: To summarize the current literature on both nonoperative and operative approaches for distal biceps brachii tendon ruptures and to quantify results and limitations. The advantages and disadvantages of the different surgical strategies were investigated as well. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in March 2020 using PubMed Central, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Iscrctn.com, clinicaltrials.gov, greylit.org, opengrey.eu, and Scopus literature databases. All human studies evaluating the clinical outcome of nonoperative treatment as well as different surgical techniques were included. The influence of the treatment approach was assessed in terms of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score and the Mayo Elbow Performance Index; extension, flexion, supination, and pronation range of motion (ROM); and flexion and supination strength ratio between the injured and uninjured arms. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane guidelines. RESULTS: Of 1275 studies, 53 studies (N = 1380 patients) matched the inclusion criteria. The results of the meta-analysis comparing operative versus nonoperative approaches for distal biceps tendon avulsion showed significant differences in favor of surgery in terms of DASH score (P = .02), Mayo Elbow Performance Index (P < .001), flexion strength (94.7% vs 83.0%, respectively; P < .001), and supination strength (89.2% vs 62.6%, respectively; P < .001). The surgical approach presented 10% heterotopic ossifications, 10% transient sensory nerve injuries, 1.6% transient motor nerve injuries, and a 0.1% rate of persistent motorial disorders. Comparison of the different surgical techniques showed similar results for the fixation methods, whereas the single-incision technique led to a better pronation ROM versus the double-incision approach (81.5° vs 76.1°, respectively; P = .01). CONCLUSION: The results of this meta-analysis showed the superiority of surgical management over the nonoperative approach for distal biceps tendon detachment, with superior flexion and supination strength and better patient-reported outcomes. The single-incision surgical approach demonstrated a slightly better pronation ROM compared with the double-incision approach, whereas all fixation methods led to similar outcomes.

Independent Versus Transtibial Drilling in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis With Meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction can be performed with different techniques for independent and transtibial (TT) drilling of femoral tunnels, but there is still no consensus on which approach leads to the best outcome. PURPOSE: To assess whether the independent or TT drilling approach for ACL reconstruction leads to the best functional outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted on July 1, 2020, using the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases. The influence of different femoral drilling techniques was analyzed through a meta-analysis in terms of patient-reported outcome measure scores, risk of complications, range of motion limitations, graft failure, and differential laxity. Subanalyses were performed to compare the different independent drilling techniques considered. Linear metaregression was performed to evaluate if the year of study publication influenced the results. The risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed following the Cochrane guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 22 randomized controlled trials including 1658 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Both International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score and Lysholm score were higher with the independent drilling approach (mean difference [MD], 1.24 [P = .02] and 0.55 [P = .005], respectively). No difference was documented in terms of the risk of reinjury, but independent drilling led to reduced KT-1000 arthrometer-assessed anterior tibial translation (MD, 0.23; P = .01) and a higher probability of a negative postoperative pivot-shift test finding (risk ratio, 1.13; P = .04). There were no significant differences in IKDC objective or Tegner scores. A P value of .07 was found for the association between the year of the study and IKDC objective scores. CONCLUSION: Independent femoral tunnel drilling provided better results than the TT approach, although the difference was not clinically significant. No difference was observed in the risk of reinjury. Increasingly better results were seen among surgical procedures performed in more recent years. Among the independent drilling options, the anteromedial portal technique seemed to provide the most favorable outcomes. The lack of clinically significant differences and the promising outcomes reported with new modified TT techniques suggest the importance of correct placement, rather than the tunnel drilling approach, to optimize the results of ACL reconstruction.

Home-Based vs Supervised Inpatient and/or Outpatient Rehabilitation Following Knee Meniscectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Arthroscopic meniscectomy is one of the most common orthopedic procedures. The optimal postoperative approach remains debated. Objective: To compare outcomes associated with home-based rehabilitation programs (HBP) vs standard inpatient and/or outpatient supervised physical therapy (IOP) following arthroscopic isolated meniscectomy (AM). Data Sources: A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases on March 15, 2021. The included studies were published from 1982 to 2019. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials of patients treated with HBP vs IOP after AM were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were independently screened and extracted by 2 authors according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) reporting guideline. The meta-analysis was performed using a random-effect model; when an I2 < 25% was observed, the fixed-effect model was used. The Hartung-Knapp correction was applied. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the Lysholm score (scale of 0-100 with higher scores indicating better knee function) and secondary outcomes were subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, knee extension and flexion, thigh girth, horizontal and vertical hop test, and days to return to work, as indicated in the PROSPERO registration. Outcomes were measured in the short-term (ranging from 28 to 50 days) and the midterm (6 months). Results: In this meta-analysis of 8 RCTs including 434 patients, IOP was associated with a greater short-term improvement in Lysholm score compared with HBP, with a mean difference of -8.64 points (95% CI, -15.14 to -2.13 points; P = .02) between the 2 approached, but the sensitivity analysis showed no difference. Similarly, no statistically significant difference was detected at midterm for Lysholm score, with a mean difference between groups of -4.78 points (95% CI, -9.98 to 0.42 points; P = .07). HBP was associated with a greater short-term improvement in thigh girth, with a mean difference between groups of 1.38 cm (95% CI, 0.27 to 2.48 cm; P = .01), whereas IOP was associated with a better short-term vertical hop score, with a mean difference between groups of -3.25 cm (95% CI, -6.20 to -0.29 cm; P = .03). No differences were found for all the other secondary outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: No intervention was found to be superior in terms of physical and functional outcomes as well as work-related and patient-reported outcomes, both at short-term and midterm follow-up. Overall, these results suggest that HBP may be an effective management approach after AM in the general population.

Post-operative hypercoagulable whole blood profiles in patients undergoing open thoracotomy vs video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) have a lower risk of thrombosis compared to those undergoing open thoracotomy (OT) which may be due to several post-operative factors such as early mobilisation, shorter hospital stays, lower transfusion rates and lower risk of infections. Whether the higher thrombotic risk after OT is also linked to a peri-operative hypercoagulable state is a matter of debate. We therefore conducted a case-control study to compare peri-operative coagulation profiles in patients with primary lung cancer undergoing VATS vs OT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing VATS or OT for primary lung cancer at the Department of Thoracic Surgery of Padua University Hospital, Italy, between February and June 2018 were enrolled. Each patient provided a venous blood sample at least 30 min prior to surgical incision (T0) and 4±1 days after surgery (T1). Peri-operative coagulation profiles were assessed via traditional, viscoelastic whole blood (ROTEM® [Instrumentation Laboratory-Werfen]) and impedance aggregometry (Multiplate® Analyser [Roche Diagnostics]) tests. RESULTS: We enrolled 65 patients (males 43, females 22; mean age 65±13 years) of whom 35 (54%) underwent VATS and 30 (46%) underwent OT. Compared to healthy controls, the surgical group (VATS and OT patients) had a significantly shorter clot formation time and higher alpha angle and maximum clot firmness values, as well as increased mean platelet function. In the post-operative period, patients who underwent OT had a significantly shorter clot formation time, higher alpha angle and maximum clot firmness values and higher mean platelet function vs VATS patients. DISCUSSION: Whole blood ROTEM® profiles and Multiplate® aggregometry identified a more hypercoagulable post-operative state in patients who underwent OT than in those who underwent VATS. Larger studies are warranted to confirm our results and ascertain whether the observed hypercoagulability might promote post-operative thrombosis.