| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Tapasvi, S, et al.
(författare)
-
Discoid lateral meniscus: current concepts
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of ISAKOS : joint disorders & orthopaedic sports medicine. - : Elsevier BV. - 2059-7762. ; 6:1, s. 14-21
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 3. |
- Diermeier, T., et al.
(författare)
-
Treatment after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Isakos Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports Medicine. - : Elsevier BV. - 2059-7754. ; 6:3, s. 129-137
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Treatment strategies for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best practice guidelines for the management of ACL injury is to a large extent based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance towards consensus opinions regarding the best available evidence on operative versus non-operative treatment for ACL injury. The purpose of this study was to report the consensus statements on operative versus non-operative treatment of ACL injuries developed at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium 2019. Sixty-six international experts on the management of ACL injuries, representing 18 countries, convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Proposed consensus statements were drafted by the Scientific Organising Committee and Session Chairs for the three working groups. Panel participants reviewed preliminary statements prior to the meeting and provided initial agreement and comments on the statement via online survey. During the meeting, discussion and debate occurred for each statement, after which a final vote was then held. Eighty per cent agreement was defined a priori as consensus. A total of 11 of 13 statements on operative veresus non-operative treatment of ACL injury reached consensus during the symposium. Nine statements achieved unanimous support; two reached strong consensus; one did not achieve consensus; and one was removed due to redundancy in the information provided. In highly active patients engaged in jumping, cutting and pivoting sports, early anatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is recommended due to the high risk of secondary meniscus and cartilage injuries with delayed surgery, although a period of progressive rehabilitation to resolve impairments and improve neuromuscular function is recommended. For patients who seek to return to straight plane activities, non-operative treatment with structured, progressive rehabilitation is an acceptable treatment option. However, with persistent functional instability or when episodes of giving way occur, anatomical ACLR is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field will assist clinicians in deciding between operative and non-operative treatment with patients after an ACL injury. Level of evidence: V
|
|
| 4. |
- Meredith, S. J., et al.
(författare)
-
Return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Isakos Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports Medicine. - : Elsevier BV. - 2059-7754. ; 6:3, s. 138-146
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives A precise and consistent definition of return to sport (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is lacking, and there is controversy surrounding the process of returning patients to sports and their previous activity level. The aim of the Panther Symposium ACL Injury RTS Consensus Group was to provide a clear definition of RTS after ACL injury and description of the RTS continuum, as well as provide clinical guidance on RTS testing and decision-making. Methods An international, multidisciplinary group of ACL experts convened as part of a consensus meeting. Consensus statements were developed using a modified Delphi method. Literature review was performed to report the supporting evidence. Results Key points include that RTS is characterised by achievement of the preinjury level of sport and involves a criteria-based progression from return to participation to RTS, and ultimately return to performance. Purely time-based RTS decision-making should be abandoned. Progression occurs along an RTS continuum with decision-making by a multidisciplinary group that incorporates objective physical examination data and validated and peer-reviewed RTS tests, which should involve functional assessment as well as psychological readiness. Consideration should be given to biological healing, contextual factors and concomitant injuries. Conclusion The resultant consensus statements and scientific rationale aim to inform the reader of the complex process of RTS after ACL injury that occurs along a dynamic continuum. Research is needed to determine the ideal RTS test battery, the best implementation of psychological readiness testing and methods for the biological assessment of healing and recovery.
|
|
