-
Boesen Abdi posted an update 6 months, 2 weeks ago
8%/73.4%, 78.3%/81.2%, and 76.5%/78.5%, respectively. Intra- and inter-observer reliabilities for both reviewers were good to very good (k= 0.85/0.93, p < 0.001; k = 0.74-0.89, p < 0.001). For all clinical tests, while specificity was very high, sensitivity was very low and the overall accuracy was also low.
MRA showed high diagnostic performance for the diagnosis of SSC tendon tears, especially full-thickness tears, with good inter- and intra-observer reliabilities, regardless of the level of experience of the reviewer.
MRA showed high diagnostic performance for the diagnosis of SSC tendon tears, especially full-thickness tears, with good inter- and intra-observer reliabilities, regardless of the level of experience of the reviewer.
We evaluated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings in patients with clinically diagnosed medial epicondylitis (ME) and determined whether any of the MRI findings correlated with the follow-up pain level after nonoperative treatment.
We retrospectively reviewed 83 patients who had undergone elbow MRI examinations for clinically diagnosed ME and who were followed-up for more than 6months. Five categories of MRI findings were selected for qualitative grading common flexor tendon (CFT) origin signal changes, ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) insufficiency, ulnar neuritis, bony changes of the medial epicondyle, and calcification. The mean follow-up after MRI examination was 21months. We performed multivariate regression analysis to analyze whether any of these MRI findings were associated with the follow-up pain level after nonoperative treatment.
Positive MRI findings included CFT origin signal changes (66%), ulnar neuritis (40%), UCL insufficiency (30%), calcification (27%), and bony changes (18%). Multically diagnosed ME.Idiopathic intervertebral disc calcification is a rare condition in children with a very good prognosis. As there are no biological markers, imaging is invaluable for diagnosing this “do not touch” lesion. While the characteristic feature is nucleus pulposus calcification at one or more cervical or thoracic levels, it is important that practitioners be able to recognize atypical patterns so that biopsy can be avoided. Here we report a case of pediatric idiopathic intervertebral disc calcification with contiguous vertebral involvement and anterior longitudinal ligament ossification.
To compare post-operative physical activity and return to work after combined posterolateral corner (PLC) reconstruction (PLC-R) in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)- or posterior cruciate ligament (PCL)-based injuries.
Patients aged > 18years undergoing PLC-R using the Larson technique combined with either ACL or PCL reconstruction were included. Outcome was evaluated retrospectively after a minimum follow-up of 24months using Tegner Activity Scale, Activity Rating Scale (ARS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), work intensity according to REFA classification, and a questionnaire about type of occupation and time to return to work.
A total of 32 patients (11 ACL-based injuries and 21 PCL-based injuries) were included. Mean follow-up was 56 ± 26months in the ACL-based injury group and 59 ± 24months in the PCL-based injury group. All patients in the ACL-based injury group and 91% of patients in the PCL-based injury group returned to sports activities. Comparing pre- and post-operative values, a significant deterioration of the Tegner Activity Scale and ARS was observed in the PCL-based injury group, whereas no significant change was observed in the ACL-based injury group. KOOS subscales were generally higher in the ACL-based injury with significant differences in the subscale sports and recreational activities. Patients with ACL-based injuries returned to work significantly earlier compared to patients with PCL-based injuries (11 ± 4weeks vs. 21 ± 10weeks, p < 0.05).
High rates of return to sports and work can be expected after combined PLC-R in both ACL- and PCL-based injuries. However, deterioration of sports ability must be expected in PCL-based injuries. ACL-based injuries led to superior patient-reported outcomes and an earlier return to work, as compared to PCL-based injuries.
Level IV.
Level IV.
The purpose of the current study is to systematically review and network meta-analyze the current evidence in the literature to ascertain if there is a superior lateral extra-articular augmentation technique in conjunction with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACL.R) with respect to knee stability, re-rupture rates and functional outcomes.
The literature search was performed based on the PRISMA guidelines. Cohort studies comparing ACL.R to ACL.R + lateral extra-articular augmentation were included. Lateral extra-articular techniques included were anterolateral ligament reconstruction (ALL.R), Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire, Losee, Maraccaci, and McIntosh. Clinical outcomes were compared between ACL.R alone and the different lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques using a frequentist approach to network meta-analysis, with statistical analysis performed using R. The treatment options were ranked using the P-Score.
Twenty-eight studies with a total of 2990 patients were included. ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold technique had the highest P-Score for ACL re-ruptures and residual pivot-shift. ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire, and ALL.R all significantly reduced the rate of ACL re-rupture, and residual pivot-shift, compared to ACL.R alone. There was no significant difference between any of the lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques and ACL.R alone. ALL.R had the highest P-Score for return to play, and return to play at pre-injury level.
This study established that ACL.R + Cocker-Arnold, Lemaire and ALL.R resulted in significantly lower ipsilateral ACL re-ruptures, as well as reduced pivot-shift, compared to ACL.R alone. this website Whereas, the other lateral extra-articular augmentation techniques did not reduce pivot-shift and re-rupture. Additionally, functional outcomes and return to play were comparable between those who underwent ACL.R and lateral extra-articular augmentation and ACL.R alone.
III.
III.