-
British Journal of Sports Medicine Mar 2018To evaluate extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in treating Achilles tendinopathy (AT), greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS), medial tibial stress syndrome... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in treating Achilles tendinopathy (AT), greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS), medial tibial stress syndrome (MTSS), patellar tendinopathy (PT) and proximal hamstring tendinopathy (PHT).
DESIGN
Systematic review.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomised and non-randomised studies assessing ESWT in patients with AT, GTPS, MTSS, PT and PHT were included. Risk of bias and quality of studies were evaluated.
RESULTS
Moderate-level evidence suggests (1) no difference between focused ESWT and placebo ESWT at short and mid-term in PT and (2) radial ESWT is superior to conservative treatment at short, mid and long term in PHT. Low-level evidence suggests that ESWT (1) is comparable to eccentric training, but superior to wait-and-see policy at 4 months in mid-portion AT; (2) is superior to eccentric training at 4 months in insertional AT; (3) less effective than corticosteroid injection at short term, but ESWT produced superior results at mid and long term in GTPS; (4) produced comparable results to control treatment at long term in GTPS; and (5) is superior to control conservative treatment at long term in PT. Regarding the rest of the results, there was only very low or no level of evidence. 13 studies showed high risk of bias largely due to methodology, blinding and reporting.
CONCLUSION
Low level of evidence suggests that ESWT may be effective for some lower limb conditions in all phases of the rehabilitation.
Topics: Achilles Tendon; Conservative Treatment; Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy; Femur; Hamstring Muscles; Humans; Medial Tibial Stress Syndrome; Pain Management; Patella; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Research Design; Tendinopathy
PubMed: 28954794
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-097347 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine May 2023The extent to which concomitant cartilage repair provides an improvement in clinical outcomes after osteotomy is unclear. (Review)
Review
Isolated Osteotomy Versus Combined Osteotomy and Cartilage Repair for Osteoarthritis or Focal Chondral Defects of the Medial Compartment of the Knee Joint: A Systematic Review.
BACKGROUND
The extent to which concomitant cartilage repair provides an improvement in clinical outcomes after osteotomy is unclear.
PURPOSE
To compare studies reporting clinical outcomes after isolated osteotomy with or without cartilage repair for osteoarthritis (OA) or focal chondral defects (FCDs) of the knee joint.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines by searching PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases. The search was done to identify comparative studies that directly compared outcomes between isolated osteotomy-high tibial osteotomy or distal femoral osteotomy-and osteotomy with concomitant cartilage repair for OA or FCDs of the knee joint. Patients were evaluated based on reoperation rate, magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue score, macroscopic International Cartilage Regeneration & Joint Preservation Society score, and patient-reported outcomes.
RESULTS
In total, 6 studies-level 2 evidence (n = 2);, level 3 evidence (n = 3);, and level 4 evidence (n = 1)-met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 228 patients undergoing osteotomy alone (group A) and 255 patients undergoing osteotomy with concomitant cartilage repair (group B). The mean patient age was 53.4 and 54.8 years, respectively, and the mean preoperative alignment was 6.6° and 6.7° of varus in groups A and B, respectively. The mean follow-up time was 71.5 months. All studies assessed medial compartment lesions with varus deformity. One study compared osteotomy alone for patients with medial compartment OA versus osteotomy with autologous chondrocyte implantation for patients with FCDs of the medial compartment. Three other studies included a heterogeneous cohort of patients with OA and FCDs in both groups. Only 1 study isolated its comparison to patients with medial compartment OA and 1 study isolated its comparison to patients with FCDs.
CONCLUSION
There is limited evidence with substantial heterogeneity between studies on clinical outcomes after osteotomy alone versus osteotomy with cartilage repair for OA or FCDs of the knee joint. At this time, no conclusion can be made regarding the role of additional cartilage procedures in treating medial compartment OA or FCDs. Further studies are needed that isolate specific disease pathology and specific cartilage procedures.
PubMed: 37179710
DOI: 10.1177/23259671231162030 -
Journal of Orthopaedics 2022The management of combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries remains contentious. Clinical outcomes of surgical,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The management of combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries remains contentious. Clinical outcomes of surgical, conservative, and combined approaches have been described in a range of prospective and retrospective studies. The aim of the current systematic review was to evaluate these outcomes and assess the study methodologies.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search of the following databases was performed: PubMed, OVID, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Google Scholar. Studies were assessed using the Coleman Methodology Score.
RESULTS
52 articles were included (3 randomised controlled trials, 8 prospective comparative studies, 17 retrospective comparative studies and 24 case series). Outcome measures were heterogeneous amongst articles. The most common outcomes assessed were AP laxity, Lysholm score and medial/valgus laxity. Complications at varying follow-up times with differing grades of MCL injury were reported in 25 (48%) studies. Evidence was conflicting, with no consensus from the available published literature regarding the best method of treatment for a combined ACL and MCL injury.
CONCLUSIONS
Heterogeneous outcome measures and limited randomised controlled trials prevent advocacy of a single treatment option. Good outcomes have been reported from repair, reconstruction and conservative management of the MCL together with ACL reconstruction. Further prospective comparative data is required to evaluate MCL management choice and prognostic signs for successful nonsurgical MCL treatment.
PubMed: 35992613
DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2022.07.024 -
The American Journal of Sports Medicine Jun 2023Medial meniscus posterior root (MMPR) injuries accelerate the progression of osteoarthritis. While partial meniscectomy was once considered the gold standard for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Medial meniscus posterior root (MMPR) injuries accelerate the progression of osteoarthritis. While partial meniscectomy was once considered the gold standard for treatment, meniscus root repair has become increasingly utilized with reported improvements in clinical and biomechanical outcomes.
PURPOSE
To perform a systematic review of biomechanical outcomes and a meta-analysis of clinical and radiographic outcomes after MMPR repair.
STUDY DESIGN
Meta-analysis and systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were queried in August 2021 for studies reporting biomechanical, clinical, and radiographic outcomes after MMPR repair. Biomechanical studies were assessed for main results and conclusions. Data including study characteristics, cohort demographics, and outcomes were extracted. Included clinical studies were analyzed with a random-effects meta-analysis of proportions for binary outcomes or continuous outcomes for mean differences between preoperative and postoperative time points. Subgroup analysis for studies reporting repair outcomes with concomitant high tibial osteotomy (HTO) was performed where appropriate.
RESULTS
A total of 13 biomechanical studies were identified and reported an overall improvement in mean and peak contact pressures after MMPR repair. There were 24 clinical studies, consisting of 876 patients (877 knees), identified, with 3 studies (106 knees) reporting outcomes with concomitant HTO. The mean patient age was 57.1 years (range, 23-74 years), with a mean follow-up of 27.7 months (range, 2-64 months). Overall, clinical outcomes (Lysholm, Hospital for Special Surgery, International Knee Documentation Committee, visual analog scale for pain, Tegner, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score scores) were noted to improve postoperatively compared with preoperatively, with improved Lysholm scores in patients undergoing concomitant HTO versus MMPR repair alone. Meniscal extrusion was not significantly improved after MMPR repair compared with preoperative measurements. The progression in Kellgren-Lawrence grades from grade 0 to grades 1 to 3 occurred in 5.9% (21/354) of patients after repair, with no patients progressing from grades 1 to 3 to grade 4.
CONCLUSION
MMPR repair generally improved biomechanical outcomes and led to improved patient-reported outcomes with greater improvements noted in patients undergoing concomitant HTO. Repair did not significantly improve meniscal extrusion, while only 5.9% of patients were noted to progress to low-grade osteoarthritis. The high level of heterogeneity in the included biomechanical and clinical investigations emphasizes the need for more well-designed studies that evaluate outcomes after MMPR repair.
Topics: Humans; Young Adult; Adult; Middle Aged; Aged; Menisci, Tibial; Retrospective Studies; Knee Joint; Meniscectomy; Osteoarthritis; Arthroscopy
PubMed: 35384728
DOI: 10.1177/03635465221077271 -
Pain Reports 2022There is great interest in expanding the use of ultrasound (US), but new challenges exist with its application to lumbar facet-targeted procedures. The primary aim of... (Review)
Review
There is great interest in expanding the use of ultrasound (US), but new challenges exist with its application to lumbar facet-targeted procedures. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the risk of incorrect needle placement associated with US-guided lumbar medial branch blocks (MBB) and facet joint injections (FJI) as confirmed by fluoroscopy or computerized tomography (CT). An a priori protocol was registered, and a database search was conducted. Inclusion criteria included all study types. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood tool for assessing risk bias for observational cohort studies. Pooled analysis of the risk difference (RD) of incorrect needle placement was calculated. Pooled analysis of 7 studies demonstrated an 11% RD ( < 0.0009) of incorrect needle placement for US-guided MBB confirmed using fluoroscopy with and without contrast. Pooled analysis of 3 studies demonstrated a 13% RD ( < 0.0001) of incorrect needle placement for US-guided FJI confirmed using CT. The time to complete a single-level MBB ranged from 2.6 to 5.0 minutes. The certainty of evidence was low to very low. Ultrasound-guided lumbar MBB and FJI are associated with a significant risk of incorrect needle placement when confirmed by fluoroscopy or CT. The technical limitations of US and individual patient factors could contribute to the risk of incorrect needle placement.
PubMed: 35620250
DOI: 10.1097/PR9.0000000000001008 -
Arthroscopy : the Journal of... Mar 2016To compare the clinical outcomes between medial soft-tissue surgery and medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction for recurrent patellar dislocation without... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To compare the clinical outcomes between medial soft-tissue surgery and medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction for recurrent patellar dislocation without any evident predisposing factors.
METHODS
A literature search was performed on the established medical databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane register. The inclusion criteria were as follows: English-language papers for recurrent patellar dislocation without any evident predisposing factors, clinical trial(s) with clear description of surgical technique, adult subjects, medial soft-tissue surgery or MPFL reconstruction without combined surgery, and a follow-up longer than 2 years. The methodological quality of all articles was assessed by 2 authors according to the Coleman methodology score.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies (mean Coleman methodology score value, 74.1; standard deviation, 11.5) were included in the analysis. Five studies reported the outcomes of patients undergoing medial soft-tissue surgery, compared with 7 studies reporting MPFL reconstruction. Overall, 109 patients underwent medial soft-tissue surgery with a minimum 2-years follow-up, compared with 308 patients of MPFL reconstruction. There was one direct comparative study between medial soft-tissue surgery and MPFL reconstruction. Of the patients who received medial soft-tissue surgery, 0 to 9.7% experienced redislocation, compared with 0 to 10.7% of the MPFL reconstruction group. The ranges of differences in Kujala scores were 23.6 to 31.7 points in patients who underwent medial soft-tissue surgery and 23.11 to 38.8 points in patients who underwent MPFL reconstruction. The ranges of postoperative congruence angles were -14.4° to 8.2° for medial soft-tissue surgery and -7.7° to -5.2° for MPFL reconstruction. The ranges of postoperative lateral patellofemoral angles were 7.9° to 9.4° for medial soft-tissue surgery and 5° to 5.3° for MPFL reconstruction.
CONCLUSIONS
All studies on medial soft-tissue surgery and MPFL reconstruction for recurrent patellar dislocation without predisposing factors showed satisfactory outcomes despite the use of numerous surgical techniques, graft types, and follow-up periods.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level IV, Systematic Review.
Topics: Humans; Ligaments, Articular; Orthopedic Procedures; Patellar Dislocation; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Recurrence
PubMed: 26545305
DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.08.012 -
Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and... Aug 2022To summarize the quantitative and qualitative anatomy of the acromioclavicular (AC) and coracoclavicular (CC) ligaments of the AC joint. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To summarize the quantitative and qualitative anatomy of the acromioclavicular (AC) and coracoclavicular (CC) ligaments of the AC joint.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature evaluating the quantitative and qualitative anatomy of the CC and AC ligaments of the AC joint was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.
RESULTS
The conoid ligament (CL) arises from the posterior coracoid precipice and courses with a tapered inferior apex to insert on the conoid tubercle of the posteroinferior clavicle. The trapezoid ligament originates from the anterior-superior coracoid with medially extending fibers anterior to the conoid's C-shaped footprint and runs with the CL to insert along the trapezoid line on the inferior aspect of the anterior clavicle, anterolateral to the conoid tubercle. The AC capsule's superoposterior bundle and the CL are robust stabilizing ligaments characterized by prominent attachment sites to the posteroinferior clavicle.
CONCLUSIONS
Clear and consistent quantitative and qualitative descriptions of the CC ligaments (CL and trapezoid ligament) have been well defined; however, quantitative data on the capsuloligamentous anatomy of AC ligaments (superoposterior and anteroinferior) ligaments) remain limited.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
There are high complication and failure rates after AC joint stabilization. To improve patient outcomes, the anatomy of the CC and AC joints needs to be better understood.
PubMed: 36033198
DOI: 10.1016/j.asmr.2022.04.026 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Mar 2023Medial meniscal extrusion (MME) has received significant interest because of its correlation with medial meniscus root tears (MMRTs), its potential as a diagnostic tool,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Medial meniscal extrusion (MME) has received significant interest because of its correlation with medial meniscus root tears (MMRTs), its potential as a diagnostic tool, and its significance in the progression of knee osteoarthritis (OA).
PURPOSE
To (1) evaluate if MMRTs significantly increase MME compared with nonroot tears (NRTs) and no tears and (2) determine the clinical outcomes of increased MME.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
METHODS
Electronic database searches of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were conducted on June 6, 2022, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist criteria. The searches were conducted using the keywords "meniscus tear" and "extrusion." No restrictions were placed on the date of publication. Quality and sensitivity assessments were conducted on included studies. Major MME was defined as an extrusion ≥3 mm.
RESULTS
Twenty-two studies involving 7882 knees were included. Compared with patients with NRTs, those with MMRTs had a 1.12-mm greater mean absolute meniscal extrusion (AME) and were 3.45 times more likely to have major MME ( < .001 for both). Compared with patients with no tears, those with MMRTs had a 2.13-mm greater AME ( < .001). Within patients with MMRT, those with widely displaced MMRT had a 1.01-mm greater AME compared with nondisplaced MMRT ( < .001). Patients with OA had a 0.73-mm greater AME and were 3.86 times more likely to have major MME compared with patients without OA ( < .001 for both). Within patients who were not stratified according to MMRT, NRT, or no tears, those who eventually developed OA had a 0.79-mm greater AME than those who did not have OA ( = .02).
CONCLUSION
Patients with MMRTs had higher MME values compared with those with other types of meniscal tears and those without any meniscal tears. Patients with knee OA were more likely to have higher MME compared with those without OA.
PubMed: 36909671
DOI: 10.1177/23259671231151698 -
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine May 2017The medial collateral ligament (MCL) is the most frequently injured ligament of the knee, but it infrequently requires surgical treatment. Current literature on MCL... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The medial collateral ligament (MCL) is the most frequently injured ligament of the knee, but it infrequently requires surgical treatment. Current literature on MCL reconstructions is sparse and offers mixed outcome measures.
PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS
The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of isolated MCL reconstruction and multiligamentous MCL reconstruction. Our hypothesis was that in selective patients, MCL reconstruction would significantly improve objective and subjective patient knee performance measures, those being baseline valgus laxity, range of motion, objective and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, Tegner score, and Lysholm knee activity scores.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and utilizing 3 computer-based databases. Studies reporting clinical outcomes of patients undergoing MCL reconstruction due to chronic instability or injury with mean follow-up of at least 2 years and levels of evidence 1 to 4 were eligible for inclusion. All relevant subject demographics and study data were statistically analyzed using 2-sample and 2-proportion tests.
RESULTS
Ten studies involving 275 patients met our inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 46 underwent isolated MCL reconstruction while another 229 underwent reconstruction of the MCL in addition to a variety of concomitant reconstructions. Overall outcomes for all patients were significant for (1) reducing the medial opening of the knee (8.1 ± 1.3 vs 1.4 ± 1.0 mm; < .001), (2) improving the patient's objective IKDC score (1.2% vs 88.4%; < .001), (3) improving the patient's subjective IKDC score (49.8 ± 6.9 vs 82.4 ± 9.6; < .001), and (4) improving the Lysholm knee activity score (69.3 ± 5.9 vs 90.5 ± 6.6; < .001). No differences existed between concomitant reconstruction groupings except that postoperative Lysholm scores were better for MCL/anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction than MCL/posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (94.3 ± 4.5 vs 84.0 ± 11.7; < .001). Normal or nearly normal range of motion was obtained by 88% of all patients.
CONCLUSION
The systematic review of 10 studies and 275 knees found that the reported patient outcomes after MCL reconstruction were significantly improved across all measures studied, with no significant difference in outcomes between concomitant reconstructions.
PubMed: 28567427
DOI: 10.1177/2325967117703920 -
Journal of Bodywork and Movement... Oct 2023To Investigate the effects of intrinsic foot muscle (IFM) strengthening on foot's medial longitudinal arch (MLA) mobility and function in healthy individuals. We also... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To Investigate the effects of intrinsic foot muscle (IFM) strengthening on foot's medial longitudinal arch (MLA) mobility and function in healthy individuals. We also identified exercise type and resistance training characteristics (series and repetitions).
METHODS
Eight databases were searched, between October 2020 and February 2021 and updated in May 2021. We included randomized controlled trials involving IFM strengthening exercises compared with controls (no exercise or exercises not involving isolated intrinsic foot muscle strengthening). Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using PEDro scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Quality of evidence was evaluated using GRADE model (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations).
RESULTS
Four randomized controlled trials (RCT) were included. IFM strengthening did not change MLA mobility in the short-term (4 weeks); however, it promoted medium-term effects (8 weeks - low quality of evidence). IFM exercises improved function in the short and medium-term (low quality of evidence). Most studies used the short-foot exercise and the toe-towel curl exercise with contractions of 5 s and load progression from sitting to standing.
CONCLUSION
IFM strengthening exercises change MLA mobility in the medium-term (8 weeks) and improve the dynamic balance of healthy individuals in short- (4 weeks) and medium-terms.
Topics: Humans; Foot; Exercise Therapy; Muscle, Skeletal; Exercise; Resistance Training
PubMed: 37949605
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2023.05.010