| 1. |
- 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
|
|
| 2. |
- Diermeier, T. A., et al.
(författare)
-
Treatment after ACL injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group
- 2021
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 55:1, s. 14-22
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Treatment strategies for ACL injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best practice guidelines to manage ACL injury is largely based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened determine consensus regarding best available evidence on operative versus non-operative treatment for ACL injury. The purpose of this study is 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. 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 versus 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 ACL reconstruction 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 ACL reconstruction is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field may assist clinicians in deciding between operative and non-operative treatment with patients after an ACL injury.
|
|
| 3. |
- Shanmugaraj, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Press-fit fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction yields low graft failure and revision rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0942-2056 .- 1433-7347. ; 29, s. 1750-1759
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Purpose Press-fit fixation is a hardware-free technique in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). The purpose of this review was to quantitatively assess the risk profile and outcomes of press-fit fixation and provide an update on its effectiveness compared to more standard fixation techniques of ACLR. Methods The electronic databases PUBMED, MEDLINE, and EMBASE were searched on March 26, 2020 for therapeutic randomized controlled trials (RCT) addressing press-fit fixation for primary ACLR. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool was used to assess the quality for randomized studies. A meta-analysis with a random-effects model was used to pool applicable outcomes data. Results A total of six eligible RCTs were included in this review. There were 292 patients (72.9% male) with a mean age of 28.8 +/- 3.8 years and a mean follow-up of 81.3 +/- 88.3 months that underwent press-fit ACLR on the femoral, tibial or both tunnels. Femoral fixation techniques included press-fit fixation (96.6%) and cross-pin fixation (3.4%). Tibial fixation techniques included press-fit (37.0%), staples (28.1%), interference screws (21.2%) and abarticular post-screws (13.7%). Graft options included bone-patellar tend--bone autografts (73.6%) and semitendinosus and gracilis tendon autograft (26.4%). Significant improvements (p < 0.05) from baseline to follow-up were found for clinical outcomes. Significantly less postoperative bone tunnel enlargement (p < 0.05) was found with tibial press-fit fixation when compared to biodegradable screws. The overall complication rate was 13.3%. There were no significant differences in complication rates [odds ratio = 0.84 (95%CI 0.43-1.66);p = n.s.] (I-2 = 0%) between patients undergoing femoral press-fit fixation and femoral metal interference screw fixation. Conclusion The overall graft failure and revision rates with press-fit ACLR were low. There were no significant differences in complication rates between patients undergoing femoral press-fit and femoral metal interference screw fixation. Included studies found that patients undergoing press-fit fixation for ACLR had significant improvements in functional outcome scores postoperatively and had significantly reduced postoperative bone tunnel enlargement compared to patients undergoing bioabsorbable fixation. Thus, early evidence suggests that press-fit fixation appears to be a good option for patients undergoing ACLR.
|
|
| 4. |
- Winkler, P. W., et al.
(författare)
-
Evolving evidence in the treatment of primary and recurrent posterior cruciate ligament injuries, part 1: anatomy, biomechanics and diagnostics
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0942-2056 .- 1433-7347. ; 29:3, s. 672-681
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) represents an intra-articular structure composed of two distinct bundles. Considering the anterior and posterior meniscofemoral ligaments, a total of four ligamentous fibre bundles of the posterior knee complex act synergistically to restrain posterior and rotatory tibial loads. Injury mechanisms associated with high-energy trauma and accompanying injury patterns may complicate the diagnostic evaluation and accuracy. Therefore, a thorough and systematic diagnostic workup is necessary to assess the severity of the PCL injury and to initiate an appropriate treatment approach. Since structural damage to the PCL occurs in more than one third of trauma patients experiencing acute knee injury with hemarthrosis, background knowledge for management of PCL injuries is important. In Part 1 of the evidence-based update on management of primary and recurrent PCL injuries, the anatomical, biomechanical, and diagnostic principles are presented. This paper aims to convey the anatomical and biomechanical knowledge needed for accurate diagnosis to facilitate subsequent decision-making in the treatment of PCL injuries.
|
|
| 5. |
- Winkler, P. W., et al.
(författare)
-
Evolving evidence in the treatment of primary and recurrent posterior cruciate ligament injuries, part 2: surgical techniques, outcomes and rehabilitation
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0942-2056 .- 1433-7347. ; 29:3, s. 682-693
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Abstract: Isolated and combined posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) injuries are associated with severe limitations in daily, professional, and sports activities as well as with devastating long-term effects for the knee joint. As the number of primary and recurrent PCL injuries increases, so does the body of literature, with high-quality evidence evolving in recent years. However, the debate about the ideal treatment approach such as; operative vs. non-operative; single-bundle vs. double-bundle reconstruction; transtibial vs. tibial inlay technique, continues. Ultimately, the goal in the treatment of PCL injuries is restoring native knee kinematics and preventing residual posterior and combined rotatory knee laxity through an individualized approach. Certain demographic, anatomical, and surgical risk factors for failures in operative treatment have been identified. Failures after PCL reconstruction are increasing, confronting the treating surgeon with challenges including the need for revision PCL reconstruction. Part 2 of the evidence-based update on the management of primary and recurrent PCL injuries will summarize the outcomes of operative and non-operative treatment including indications, surgical techniques, complications, and risk factors for recurrent PCL deficiency. This paper aims to support surgeons in decision-making for the treatment of PCL injuries by systematically evaluating underlying risk factors, thus preventing postoperative complications and recurrent knee laxity. Level of evidence: V. © 2020, The Author(s).
|
|
