The role of osteoarthritis severity, BMI and age on clinical efficacy of bone marrow aspirate concentrate in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess whether BMI, severity of knee osteoarthritis, age and gender have any influence on the final clinical results of bone marrow aspirate concentrate injection. Method: A total of 111 study participants with painful knee osteoarthritis and different characteristics concerning before mentioned factors underwent bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) therapy and were followed up for 1 year. Result: Significant pain and functional improvement were observed in all participant groups. Participants' age and BMI did not influence the clinical outcome, but there was an influence of OA severity, especially among older patients. Conclusion: This study shows that BMAC therapy is effective. Younger patients with milder OA changes could be better candidates for long-lasting and more efficient BMAC therapy. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03825133 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate versus Platelet Rich Plasma or Hyaluronic Acid for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis.

Background: In the last decade, regenerative therapies have become one of the leading disease modifying options for treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). Still, there is a lack of trials with a direct comparison of different biological treatments. Our aim was to directly compare clinical outcomes of knee injections of Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate (BMAC), Platelet-rich Plasma (PRP), or Hyaluronic acid (HA) in the OA treatment. Methods: Patients with knee pain and osteoarthritis KL grade II to IV were randomized to receive a BMAC, PRP, and HA injection in the knee. VAS, WOMAC, KOOS, and IKDC scores were used to establish baseline values at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. All side effects were reported. Results: A total of 175 patients with a knee osteoarthritis KL grade II-IV were randomized; 111 were treated with BMAC injection, 30 with HA injection, and 34 patients with PRP injection. There were no differences between these groups when considering KL grade, BMI, age, or gender. There were no serious side effects. The mean VAS scores after 3, 7, 14, and 21 days showed significant differences between groups with a drop of VAS in all groups but with a difference in the BMAC group in comparison to other groups (p < 0.001). There were high statistically significant differences between baseline scores and those after 12 months (p < 0.001) in WOMAC, KOOS, KOOS pain, and IKDC scores, and in addition, there were differences between these scores in the BMAC group in comparison with other groups, except for the PRP group in WOMAC and the partial IKDC score. There were no differences between the HA and PRP groups, although PRP showed a higher level of clinical improvement. Conclusions: Bone marrow aspirate concentrate, Leukocyte rich Platelet Rich Plasma, and Hyaluronic acid injections are safe therapeutic options for knee OA and provide positive clinical outcomes after 12 months in comparison with findings preceding the intervention. BMAC could be better in terms of clinical improvements in the treatment of knee OA than PRP and HA up to 12 months. PRP provides better outcomes than HA during the observation period, but these results are not statistically significant. More randomized controlled trials and high quality comparative studies are needed for direct correlative conclusions.

Comprehensive Review of Knee Osteoarthritis Pharmacological Treatment and the Latest Professional Societies' Guidelines.

Osteoarthritis is the most common musculoskeletal progressive disease, with the knee as the most commonly affected joint in the human body. While several new medications are still under research, many symptomatic therapy options, such as analgesics (opioid and non-opioid), nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drugs, symptomatic slow-acting drugs in osteoarthritis, and preparations for topical administration, are being used, with a diverse clinical response and inconsistent conclusions across various professional societies guidelines. The concept of pharmacogenomic-guided therapy, which lies on principles of the right medication for the right patient in the right dose at the right time, can significantly increase the patient's response to symptom relief therapy in knee osteoarthritis. Corticosteroid intra-articular injections and hyaluronic acid injections provoke numerous discussions and disagreements among different guidelines, even though they are currently used in daily clinical practice. Biological options, such as platelet-rich plasma and mesenchymal stem cell injections, have shown good results in the treatment of osteoarthritis symptoms, greatly increasing the patient's quality of life, especially when combined with other therapeutic options. Non-inclusion of the latter therapies in the guidelines, and their inconsistent stance on numerous therapy options, requires larger and well-designed studies to examine the true effects of these therapies and update the existing guidelines.

Do knee injection portals affect clinical results of bone marrow aspirate concentrate injection in the treatment of osteoarthritis? A prospective randomized controlled study.

Aim: To explore the effect that the location of needle placement has on efficacy and tolerability of bone marrow aspirate concentrate injections during treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Methods: Bone marrow aspirate concentrate injections were administered to 111 patients via superolateral, anteromedial or anterolateral portals. Pain was assessed by visual analog scale before and 3, 7, 14 and 21 days after intervention. Knee function was assessed by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and International Knee Documentation Committee scores before and 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after intervention. Results: Significant differences in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and International Knee Documentation Committee scores were observed 12 months post intervention compared with baseline (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). No significant differences in outcome or pain scores were observed among groups. Conclusion: All portals demonstrated similar clinical benefits up to 12 months after intervention. Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03825133).

Femoral neck fractures in children and the role of early hip decompression in final outcome.

BACKGROUND: Femoral neck fractures in children are very rare and account for about 1% of all paediatric fractures. The aim of this retrospective study was to analyse the clinical and radiographic outcome in paediatric femoral neck fracture and to review the role of early decompression of the hip in the final outcome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was performed at the Department of Paediatric Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University Children's Hospital in Belgrade, Serbia from January 1996 to January 2010. The study included 28 patients, 12 female and 16 male, aged 4-14 years. Patients who were aged over 14 years or who had pathological femoral neck fractures or metabolic disturbances were excluded from the study. The type of neck fracture was determined according to the Delbet and Colonna classification. The patients were treated using different surgical procedures: closed reduction and cast immobilisation, closed reduction and percutaneous fixation with Kirschner wires (K-wires), closed reduction and fixation with cannulated screws and open reduction with Wagner plate stabilisation. The final outcome was evaluated using the clinical outcome (based on the Howorth-Ferguson scale), radiographic outcome and occurrence of complications. RESULTS: The median age of patients included in the study was 10.75 years and the average follow up was 9 years. According to the Delbet classification, there was one patient with type I, eight patients with type II, 16 patients with type III and three patients with type IV femoral neck fracture. Based on the Colonna classification, there were 23 displaced and five non-displaced femoral neck fractures. Decompression of the hip was performed in 21 patients. Avascular necrosis (AVN) developed as the main complication in 11 patients. The final outcome was excellent in 14 patients, good in four patients and poor in 14 patients. CONCLUSION: Our study unequivocally confirms the positive effect of urgent treatment on the incidence of AVN as well as on the outcome. We have established a 12-hour interval after injury as an optimal time limit for commencing treatment. Unambiguously positive effects of hip decompression on the incidence of AVN were also noted. We found similar efficiency for open and needle hip decompression.

Single-row arthroscopic cuff repair with double-loaded anchors provides good shoulder function in long-term follow-up.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of arthroscopic cuff reconstruction, which is currently preferred in our service, and to compare functional outcome after arthroscopic cuff reconstruction comparing different types and sizes of rotator cuff tears. We switched completely from open repair to the full-arthroscopic repair > ten years ago, and since then, we are developing a technique that can produce the best results. Therefore, we decided to verify results. METHODS: Seventy-two patients with rotator cuff tear underwent arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Single-row arthroscopic repair using double-loaded metal anchors and margin-convergence sutures with concomitant procedures were performed in all cases. All patients were assessed and classified before and after surgery using the Constant scoring system and the Oxford Shoulder Score. Tears were measured and classified as medium (1-3 cm), large(3-5 cm) and massive (>5 cm). RESULTS: The average age of participants was 59 ± 9 years (33-76). There were five medium, 43 large and 23 massive tears. The average functional Constant score at the last follow-up was 91.68 ± 10.62, and the Oxford score averaged 43.23 ± 5.84 without statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) among groups Best results were in the massive-tear group, with an overall Constant score of 98.60 ± 2.61 and an average Oxford score of 47.60 ± 0.55. Full recovery was obtained between six months and one year. We used our own modified rehabilitation protocol and found no postoperative stiffness in this series. CONCLUSIONS: Single-row arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using double-loaded metal anchors and margin-convergence sutures with concomitant procedures, when necessary, provides excellent results. Pain, range of motion, muscle strength and function were significantly improved after single-row repair among all morphological types of cuff lesions.

Local or spinal anesthesia in acute knee surgery.

The aim of the study was to assess the efficacy, safety and complications of two anesthetic techniques including local and spinal anesthesia. A total of 436 patients received local (LA group = 250) or spinal (SA group = 186) anesthesia during a year period. SA group received 0.5% Bupivacaine 5 mg/mL. LA group received portal injection (5 mL lidocaine 2% with adrenaline) and intra-articular injection into the knee (10 mL lidocaine 2% with adrenaline). The following parameters were assessed: intraoperative pain (10 cm VAS: 0 = no pain, 10 = extreme pain), surgical operating conditions, patient satisfaction score (1 = very satisfied, 4 = very unsatisfied), postoperative analgesia, and time to discharge. In LA group, 97.6% (244/250) of patients experienced no pain throughout the procedure. Only six (2.4%) patients required conversion to general anesthesia. In SA group, two patients required conversion to general anesthesia. In both groups, 93.6% of patients were either satisfied or very satisfied with their anesthesia. The need ofpostoperative analgesics was higher in SA compared with LA group (p = 0.001). The mean postoperative stay was significantly shorter in LA than in SA group (p = 0.001). Ninety-four percent of LA and only 68% of SA patients were discharged from the hospital within 2 hours of the procedure. The rate of complications differed significantly between LA and SA groups (p = 0.037). Outpatient arthroscopy of the knee under local anesthesia is a simple, reliable, and safe alternative to spinal anesthesia, for patients in whom intraarticular disorders requiring diagnostic arthroscopy and arthroscopic surgery.

Outpatient arthroscopic knee surgery under combined local and intravenous propofol anesthesia in children and adolescents.

BACKGROUND: This prospective observational study included a case series of children and adolescents receiving light intravenous propofol anesthesia combined with local anesthesia (LA) for arthroscopic knee procedures. The aim was to examine the merits of anesthesia, to discuss the indications for the procedure and to analyze recovery/discharge times from the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). METHODS: A cohort of 147 children and adolescents (ASA 1 and 2) aged 12-18 years admitted for outpatient arthroscopic knee procedures between January 2004 and May 2005 were studied. After IV access in the operating theater, the patients received propofol (10 mg.ml(-1)). Arthroscopy was performed approximately 15 min after injecting local anesthetic (15 ml 2% lidocaine with epinephrine 1:200,000) partly at the site of insertion of the arthroscope and other instruments (5 ml), and the rest intra-articular. The following parameters were assessed: airway patency, propofol requirement, vital signs, procedure time, surgical operating conditions, patient satisfaction score, time to discharge, postoperative analgesia and adverse events. RESULTS: Of 147 patients, 133 patients (90.5%) underwent arthroscopic knee surgery, whereas knee arthroscopy alone was performed in 14 patients (9.5%) without indication for operative treatment. The arthroscopy was well tolerated in 96.6% patients (no pain, movement or discomfort during the procedure) and only five patients required conversion to general anesthesia. Pain experienced during the injection of lidocaine was more severe than pain experienced during the surgical procedure itself (P < 0.001). The surgical evaluation of operative conditions (visualization and access to intra-articular structures) was generally satisfactory and completely acceptable. Almost 94% (138/147) of patients said they would have the same procedure again under the same type of anesthesia. The mean propfol induction dose was 1.4 mg.kg(-1) (range: 0.9-3.8) and mean propofol infusion rate 167 microg.kg(-1).min(-1) (range: 130-250). Movement was more likely at lower infusion rates (mean: 151 microg.kg(-1).min(-1)). The maximal decrease in respiratory rate was 5.9 +/- 5.1 br.min(-1) (27.2 +/- 21%) and no patient became hypoxic. Patients recovered to preoperative values at 9.8 +/- 7.5 min following infusion discontinuation. There were no respiratory or cardiovascular complications. The mean stay in PACU was 47 min (range: 32-150). As many as 71% (105/147) of patients required no analgesics during the first two postoperative hours. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of light intravenous propofol anesthesia combined with local anesthesia for arthroscopic knee procedures provided effective sedation, good preservation of upper airway patency, rapid recovery and pain relief without major side effects and offers a good alternative to the methods already available. The majority of patients did not require postoperative analgesia.

Outpatient arthroscopic knee surgery under multimodal analgesic regimens.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether diclofenac could be used in preemptive and multimodal fashion with local anesthesia (LA) during arthroscopic knee surgery. METHODS: A cohort of 628 patients (age range, 14 to 60 years) underwent outpatient arthroscopic knee surgery under LA with 15 mL of 2% lidocaine with epinephrine. Diclofenac 1 mg/kg was administered immediately before the procedure was performed. Pain was intraoperatively assessed with a 10-cm visual analogue scale (VAS). Patients' and surgeons' satisfaction with the quality of anesthesia was estimated by a special questionnaire and VAS score. RESULTS: From the technical point of view, arthroscopic procedures were successfully completed in 98.2% of patients. Pain experienced during injection of lidocaine (VAS score: median, 2.9; mean, 3.4; standard deviation [SD], 3.2; range, 0 to 10) was more severe (P = .0001) than pain experienced during the surgical procedure itself (VAS score: median, 1.8; mean, 2.4; SD, 2.2; range, 0 to 5.2). Arthroscopy was well tolerated by most patients (98.5%), and only 1.4% of procedures had to be terminated prematurely because of patient discomfort. Almost 95.7% of patients reported that they would undergo the same procedure again under the same type of anesthesia. In 4.7% of patients, LA was not considered optimal by the performing surgeon. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic knee surgery with diclofenac and LA with no premedication is an efficient and well-tolerated method used in outpatient practice with no major adverse effects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Neglected rupture of the Achilles tendon treated with peroneus brevis transfer: a functional assessment of 5 cases.

The purpose of this study was to review the clinical results of 5 patients who underwent repair of a chronic Achilles tendon rupture using a combination of peroneus brevis transfer and plantaris tendon augmentation. The technique belongs to the group of local tendon transfer procedures making use of the transferred peroneus brevis tendon as strengthening material together with the plantaris tendon as suturing material. There were 4 males and 1 female with an average age of 49.4 years and an average time to presentation postinjury of 19.8 weeks (range 5-40 wk). All patients underwent Cybex strength testing before and approximately 1 year after surgery. This testing demonstrated a postoperative improvement in peak plantarflexion torque (Newton-meters/body weight) in all cases. The peak torque of plantar flexion increased in all patients (range, 21%-410%). Four patients were found to have an increase of the dorsal flexors peak torque (range, 31%-290%), whereas one patient showed a decrease (-37%). No patient experienced wound closure complications, postoperative pain, or functional limitations. In spite the possibility of residual lateral ankle instability, we found this modification to be a valuable innovation that offers a very good functional result, low morbidity, technical advantages to the surgeon and, most important, a durable and satisfactory result for the patients.