Outcome of meniscal repair prior compared with concurrent ACL reconstruction.

Meniscal tears are commonly associated with traumatic rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL). At our centre, if a patient presents with locked knee in conjunction with an ACL injury we perform an initial arthroscopy to remove the cause of locking and schedule ACL reconstruction once a full range of motion has returned. The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of meniscal tears stabilised prior to ACL reconstruction. We identified 24 patients who underwent repair of a torn meniscus before having their ACL reconstruction (group 1). As a comparison group we identified 148 patients who underwent meniscal repair at the time of ACL reconstruction (group 2). Twelve of the patients in group 1 underwent meniscectomy, seven at the time of reconstruction and five subsequently. This gives a success rate of 50% (12/24) in the ACL deficient patients. In comparison forty two of the patients in group 2 went on to have a meniscectomy representing a success of 72% (106/148). The odds ratio for meniscectomy in an ACL deficient meniscal repair is 2.52 (95% CI 1.07-5.97) and there is a relative risk of 1.76 (95% CI 1.05-2.63). The difference in success of the meniscal repair between the groups was significant (Fisher's exact test p=0.05). Meniscal repair and delayed ACL reconstruction is more likely to fail than a combined repair and ACL reconstruction.

White on white meniscal tears to fix or not to fix?

The mechanical disadvantage to articular cartilage following meniscectomy has been well documented in the literature. Meniscal repair in the avascular (white on white) is controversial and would be deemed inappropriate by many. We have developed criteria for repair in all meniscal tears. These are: The meniscus 1. must not be degenerated 2. must be reducible, without a rolled edge 3. the fixation must be considered sound. Between 1999 and 2008 our department prospectively collected data on meniscal repairs as part of a sports database. Four hundred and twenty three patients underwent repair during this time period. We identified 87 patients with no co existent ACL injury or instability. There were 73 males and 14 females with a mean age of 26 years (13-54). All tears were in the non peripheral (white on white) area. The criterion for failure was reoperation on the same meniscus requiring excision or re fixation. The mean follow up was 49 months (10-112). Twenty eight patients required further surgery on their repaired meniscus. There were eight re-repairs and 20 partial menisectomies. This represents a success rate of 68% (59/87). The mean pre operative Lysholm score was 61 (4-88) which rose to 75 (12-100) postoperatively, p=0.002. The mean pre op Tegner score was 6 (3-10) and this did not change significantly post operatively, mean 6 (0-10) p=0.4. Isolated white on white avascular meniscal tears can be successfully repaired in the majority of cases with a good clinical and functional result.

Response shift in self-reported functional scores after knee microfracture for full thickness cartilage lesions.

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine whether response shift (RS), a change in the internal standards of a patient, occurs in patients treated for full thickness knee cartilage defects. We have also evaluated the effect of functional scores on patient satisfaction after surgery. DESIGN: Self-administered questionnaires were used to evaluate pre- and post-operative and retrospective post-operative scores of 53 patients following knee microfracture. Patient satisfaction, Lysholm, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain and modified International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores were evaluated. RS (pre-test-then-test), unadjusted and adjusted treatment effects (UTE and ATE) and their effect sizes were calculated. RESULTS: All four functional outcome measures had a positive RS. The effect size of the RS ranged from around 0.35 for the Lysholm and IKDC2 score to over 0.9 for the VAS pain score. Gender, age, smoking status and time since follow-up did not significantly affect the RS. RS did not differ significantly between the three patient satisfaction groups (P>0.05). Post-operative Lysholm and IKDC1 scores differed most significantly between the satisfaction groups. CONCLUSIONS: All four scores had a significant shift, implying that patients thought they felt worse before the operation in retrospect than they did at the time. The traditional way of assessing treatment effect, difference between post-intervention and pre-intervention functional scores, may be confounded by change in the internal standards of the patient and should take this into account. RS did not affect the clinical interpretation in this case series. Patient-reported satisfaction after surgery is only related to post-operative scores.

Grade III acromioclavicular joint injury in Australian Rules Football.

We have reviewed fourteen Australian Rules Football players who were seen consecutively by a single surgeon with grade III acromioclavicular joint injuries between January 1993-June 1997. After discussion at initial consultation eight players elected for non-operative management and six for operative management. Two players in the non-operative group subsequently underwent surgical reconstruction after failure of non-operative treatment. The mean return time to non-contact training was 2.4 weeks (range 1-4, S.D. 1.52) in the non-operative group and 6.3 weeks (range 3.5-10, S.D. 2.99) in the operative group. However return to sports specific training (contact training) was at a mean of 20.8 weeks (range 10-32. S.D. 8.56) in the non-operative group and 13.6 weeks (range 6-24. S.D. 7.06) in the operative group. Return to competitive football matches for the non-operative group was at a mean of 26.2 weeks (range 10-34,S.D. 8.84) and 18.8 weeks (9.5-28. S.D. 8.05) for those treated operatively. These results were not statistically significant. At final follow up the subjective scores for the current overall condition of the shoulder when compared to the uninjured side, were 72.5 (range 20-100, S:D.24.9) for the non operative group and 87.3 (range 75-100, S:D.10.61) for the operative group and this difference was also not statistically significant. Conclusions in this study are limited by small numbers and lack of statistically significant results. The results show a trend towards faster return to ARF and a more satisfactory outcome for patients undergoing surgery compared to their non operative cohorts.