Survival and Risk Factor Analysis of Arthroscopic Ramp Lesion Repair During Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of research on the management of ramp lesions associated with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries. Furthermore, there has been no report of the risk factors for failure of ramp lesion sutures, linked to either the technique used (all-inside suture implant vs suture hook through a posteromedial portal) or the type of lesion (location in the red zone or meniscocapsular junction, longitudinal extension, partial- or full-thickness tear). PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of arthroscopic repair of ramp lesions and determine the risk factors associated with ramp lesion repair failure, with special focus on their subtype and the suture technique. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All patients who underwent arthroscopic ramp lesion repair in association with ACL reconstruction between November 2015 and January 2018 were evaluated retrospectively. The following parameters were studied: demographics; clinical history; clinical findings including International Knee Documentation Committee score, complications, time from injury to surgery, side-to-side laxity, and pivot shift; and surgical findings including subtype, surgical management, and type and number of sutures. Failure of the ramp lesion repair was defined at secondary arthroscopy. RESULTS: Among the 248 lesions analyzed, 18 (7.3%) failures were documented. The failures occurred in 21.1% of repairs managed with the all-inside device versus 4.3% of sutures managed with the suture hook (P = .003). Among the 6 factors included in the Cox model, the only one identified as a risk factor for failure was the type of repair (P = .003), with a risk for the all-inside device that was >5-fold higher than that for the suture hook repair (corresponding hazard ratio, 5.1 [95% CI, 1.8-14.5]). No other complications involving the surgical technique or device were registered. CONCLUSION: An arthroscopic all-inside technique of meniscal repair of ramp lesions appeared to be safe and effective. It provided excellent healing of the repaired meniscus, with an overall failure rate of 7.3%. The type of suture was associated with failure of the ramp lesion repair, with a significantly higher risk with the all-inside device than with suture hook repair sutures.

Ramp Lesion Subtypes: Prevalence, Imaging, and Arthroscopic Findings in 2156 Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions.

BACKGROUND: Ramp lesions are defined as a particular type of injury within the posterior horn of the medial meniscus and its meniscocapsular attachments. Five subtypes have been described: type 1, meniscocapsular lesion; type 2, partial superior lesion; type 3, partial inferior lesion or hidden type; type 4, complete tear in the red zone; and type 5, complete double tear. PURPOSE: (1) To determine the prevalence of different subtypes of ramp lesions in patients undergoing arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). (2) To describe the characteristics of ramp lesions based on imaging and diagnostic arthroscopy. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All patients who underwent arthroscopic ACLRs between November 2015 and November 2018 by 2 senior surgeons at 1 institution were evaluated retrospectively (1) to describe the subtypes of ramp lesions diagnosed intraoperatively using transnotch arthroscopic exploration of the posteromedial compartment and (2) to look for any factors significantly associated with these subtypes. The following parameters were studied: demographics; history and clinical findings including time between injury and surgery, side-to-side laxity, and pivot shift; lesions missed on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans and medial proximal tibial bone contusion visible on MRI scans; and arthroscopic confirmation of ramp lesion (ie, prevalence), associated lateral meniscal tear, or medial chondral tear. RESULTS: Out of 2156 primary or revision arthroscopic reconstructions, 334 ramp lesions were confirmed, giving a prevalence of 15.5%. The subtype distribution was as follows: type 1, 47.9%; type 2, 4.8%; type 3, 11.4%; type 4, 28.7%; type 5, 7.2%. Multivariate analysis showed that gross pivot shift was significantly associated with complete ramp tears (odds ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.7-17.2). Hidden lesions (type 3, inferior partial tear in the red zone) were the most likely to be missed on preoperative MRI (45.9%). CONCLUSION: In a population undergoing ACLR, the prevalence of ramp lesions was 15.5%. Among the subtypes of ramp lesion, the most common was a meniscocapsular junction tear (type 1). Partial inferior tears (type 3) were the most likely to be missed on preoperative MRI scans. Gross pivot shift was significantly associated with complete ramp tears (types 1, 4, and 5).

Femoroacetabular impingement treatment using the arthroscopic extracapsular outside-in approach: Does capsular suture affect functional outcome?

BACKGROUND: Over the last decades, the arthroscopic treatment of hip pathology has highly grown thanks to the evolution of surgical techniques and instrumentation development. An alternative approach consisting in making a first outside-in longitudinal capsulotomy was described by Laude at the end of the 2000s and is experiencing significant development in France. The clinical results of this technique have rarely been reported and in particular the influence of the repair of the capsule is unknown. Therefore we performed a retrospective case control study aiming to asses: (1) the clinical outcomes and complication rates of the outside-in extracapsular approach for the treatment of FemoroAcetabular Impingement (FAI) and (2) the effect of capsular closure on the functional outcome. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that the outside-in extracapsular approach is a safe and efficient technique and the capsular closure at the end of the procedure positively affects the functional outcome. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on prospectively collected data of a consecutive series of hip arthroscopies performed for surgical treatment of FAI using the outside-in extracapsular approach. Any complications during follow-up were identified and recorded. Linear regression models were used to estimate the influence of capsular closure on the functional outcome. Functional outcome was assessed using modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and Non-arthritic Hip Score (NAHS). RESULTS: Sixty-four hips in 57 patients operated by a single surgeon between October 2013 and December 2016 were analyzed at the time of final follow-up of 34.17 months (range 24 to 53). As the surgical technique evolved over time, a side-to-side capsular closure was performed at the end of the procedure for 25 hips and the capsule was left open for the remaining 39 patients. Functional outcome measurements showed an improvement from the preoperative to the last follow-up: 63.5±11.0 to 88.1±11.2 for mHHS, 63.1±13.8 to 86.4±13.4 for NAHS. Capsular closure leads to a significantly improved clinical outcome: gain in mHHS: 25.8±2.3 vs. 20.6±1.9 (p≤0.044), gain in NAHS: 26.1±2.5 vs. 19.6±2.1, (p=0.023). No major complications occurred. One case of postoperative tensor fascia latae atrophy was documented in the group "capsule left open". CONCLUSION: Hip arthroscopy in the management of FAI with an extraarticular starting point (outside-in) is a safe technique with functional results and postoperative morbidity comparable to previously reported techniques. Side-to-side capsular closure at the end of the procedure might positively affect the final functional outcome. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: III, case control retrospective study.