scholarly journals Quality and Variability of Online Available Physical Therapy Protocols From Academic Orthopaedic Surgery Programs for Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (7) ◽  
pp. 232596711985599
Author(s):  
Adam C. Lieber ◽  
Michael E. Steinhaus ◽  
Joseph N. Liu ◽  
Daniel Hurwit ◽  
Theresa Chiaia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Medial Patellofemoral Ligament ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Mpfl Reconstruction ◽  
Return To Play ◽  
Successful Outcome ◽  
Postoperative Rehabilitation ◽  
Application Service ◽  
Rehabilitation Protocols ◽  
Residency Application

Background: Unlike the literature on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, studies on medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction lack evidence-based guidelines regarding postoperative rehabilitation. An effective postoperative protocol may contribute greatly to a successful outcome following MPFL reconstruction, yet the quality and variability of these published protocols remain unknown. Purpose: To assess the quality and variability of MPFL rehabilitation protocols publicly available on the internet and associated with US academic orthopaedic programs. Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: All available isolated MPFL reconstruction rehabilitation protocols from US academic orthopaedic programs participating in the Electronic Residency Application Service were collected and included in this review. These protocols were evaluated for inclusion of various rehabilitation components, the timing of suggested initiation of these activities, and whether the protocol used evaluation-based guidelines. Results: A total of 27 protocols were included. Of these, 25 (93%) recommended immediate postoperative bracing. Time to initiation of full weightbearing ranged from 2 to 8 weeks. The most common strengthening exercises endorsed were quadriceps sets (89%), straight-legged raise (85%), and leg press (81%). The most common proprioception exercises endorsed were balance board (41%), single-legged balance (41%), and TheraBand control (33%). The median time suggested to return to play was 17 weeks. No functional test appeared in the majority of the protocols. Of the 27 protocols, 20 (74%) used evaluation-based guidelines. Conclusion: There is substantial variability in content and timing across rehabilitation protocols following MPFL reconstruction. This lack of clear guidelines can cause confusion among patients, therapists, and surgeons, leading to suboptimal patient outcomes and making it difficult to compare outcomes across the literature.

scholarly journals Isolated medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction for recurrent patellofemoral instability: analysis of outcomes and risk factors

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Filippo Migliorini ◽  
Francesco Oliva ◽  
Gayle D. Maffulli ◽  
Jörg Eschweiler ◽  
Matthias Knobe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Surgical Outcomes ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Medial Patellofemoral Ligament ◽  
Patellofemoral Instability ◽  
Mpfl Reconstruction ◽  
Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Tegner Score

Abstract Background The medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) is always damaged after patellar dislocation. In selected patients, MPFL reconstruction is necessary to restore a correct patellar tracking. Despite the large number of different techniques reported to reconstruct the MPFL, there is no consensus concerning the optimal procedure, and debates is still ongoing. The present study analysed the results after isolated MPFL reconstruction in patients with patellofemoral instability. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis of patients presenting pathoanatomical risk factors was made. Methods In November 2020, the main electronic databases were accessed. All articles reporting the results of primary isolated MPFL reconstruction for recurrent patellofemoral instability were considered for inclusion. Only articles reporting a minimum 12-month follow-up were eligible. Results Data from a total of 1777 knees were collected. The mean age of the patients involved was 22.8 ± 3.4 years. The mean follow-up was 40.7 ± 25.8 months. Overall, the range of motion (+ 27.74; P < 0.0001) and all the other scores of interests improved at last follow-up: Kujala (+ 12.76; P = 0.0003), Lysholm (+ 15.69; P < 0.0001), Tegner score (+ 2.86; P = 0.006). Seventy-three of 1780 patients (4.1%) showed a positive apprehension test. Thirty of 1765 patients (1.7%) experienced re-dislocations, while 56 of 1778 patients (3.2%) showed persisting joint instability. Twenty-five of 1786 patients (1.4%) underwent revision surgeries. Conclusion Isolated MPFL reconstruction for recurrent patellofemoral instability provides reliable surgical outcomes. Patients with pathoanatomical predisposing factors reported worse surgical outcomes.

scholarly journals Factors Affecting Subjective and Objective Outcomes and Return to Play in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Joints ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 06 (01) ◽  
pp. 023-032 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federica Rosso ◽  
Davide Bonasia ◽  
Umberto Cottino ◽  
Simone Cambursano ◽  
Federico Dettoni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Rehabilitation Program ◽  
Return To Play ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Objective Outcomes ◽  
Subjective Outcomes

Purpose To analyze the prognostic factors influencing subjective and objective outcomes and return to play (RTP) after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R). Methods Primary ACL-Rs using a transtibial technique performed between 2008 and 2012 were included. Data regarding patients, surgery, sports, and rehabilitation, including an on-field rehabilitation (OFR) and duration of the rehabilitation program, were collected. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective and objective evaluation forms, and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and Lysholm questionnaires were used for the assessment of subjective and objective outcomes. The Subjective Patient Outcome for Return to Sports and ACL–return to sport after injury (RSI) scores were used for RTP evaluation. Several potential predictors of outcome were tested with a univariate analysis. All the variables with p < 0.1 were retested in a logistic regression model to evaluate their association with the outcomes. Results In total, 176 cases were included with an average follow-up of 44.1 months. Of the patients, 92.2% were rated as normal or nearly normal at the IKDC evaluation. In addition, 90.1% of the patients returned to sport, with 57.6% returning to the same preinjury level. Objective outcomes were negatively influenced by late rehabilitation (odds ratio [OR] = 2.75). Performing an OFR phase during the rehabilitation was associated with better subjective outcomes (OR = 2.71). Length of rehabilitation strongly influenced the RTP rate (OR = 13.16). Conversely, higher ACL-RSI score was inversely related to RTP. Objective IKDC score was inversely related to the ACL-RSI (OR = 0.31), whereas subjective score was correlated with both the total ACL-RSI score (OR = 0.15) and the level of activity (OR = 0.20). Conclusion This study confirmed the role of rehabilitation on subjective and objective outcomes and on RTP. Particularly, the complete adherence to a rehabilitation program, including an OFR phase, resulted in better subjective outcomes and higher RTP rate. The relationship between psychological factors, measured through the ACL-RSI score, and RTP was confirmed. Level of Evidence Level III, observational study without a control group.

scholarly journals Bioaugmentation in the surgical treatment of anterior cruciate ligament injuries: A review of current concepts and emerging techniques

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 205031212092105
Author(s):  
Austin MacFarland Looney ◽  
Joseph Daniel Leider ◽  
Andrew Ryan Horn ◽  
Blake Michael Bodendorfer
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Return To Sport ◽  
Return To Play ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair ◽  
Anterior Cruciate

Injuries involving the anterior cruciate ligament are among the most common athletic injuries, and are the most common involving the knee. The anterior cruciate ligament is a key translational and rotational stabilizer of the knee joint during pivoting and cutting activities. Traditionally, surgical intervention in the form of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction has been recommended for those who sustain an anterior cruciate ligament rupture and wish to remain active and return to sport. The intra-articular environment of the anterior cruciate ligament makes achieving successful healing following repair challenging. Historically, results following repair were poor, and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction emerged as the gold-standard for treatment. While earlier literature reported high rates of return to play, the results of more recent studies with longer follow-up have suggested that anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction may not be as successful as once thought: fewer athletes are able to return to sport at their preinjury level, and many still go on to develop osteoarthritis of the knee at a relatively younger age. The four principles of tissue engineering (cells, growth factors, scaffolds, and mechanical stimuli) combined in various methods of bioaugmentation have been increasingly explored in an effort to improve outcomes following surgical treatment of anterior cruciate ligament injuries. Newer technologies have also led to the re-emergence of anterior cruciate ligament repair as an option for select patients. The different biological challenges associated with anterior cruciate ligament repair and reconstruction each present unique opportunities for targeted bioaugmentation strategies that may eventually lead to better outcomes with better return-to-play rates and fewer revisions.

Current Perspectives of the Australian Knee Society on Rehabilitation and Return to Sport After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (7) ◽  
pp. 970-975 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jay R. Ebert ◽  
Kate E. Webster ◽  
Peter K. Edwards ◽  
Brendan K. Joss ◽  
Peter D’Alessandro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Cruciate Ligament ◽  
Return To Sport ◽  
Postoperative Rehabilitation ◽  
Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction ◽  
Orthopedic Surgeons ◽  
Anterior Cruciate ◽  
Retear Rate

Context: The importance of rehabilitation and evaluation prior to return to sport (RTS) in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction has been reported. Objective: This study sought to investigate current perspectives of Australian orthopedic surgeons on rehabilitation and RTS evaluation. Design: Survey. Participants: Members of the Australian Knee Society. Main Outcome Measures: A 14-question survey was disseminated to Australian Knee Society members (orthopedic surgeons) to investigate (1) preferred graft choice, (2) estimated retear rate, (3) importance of preoperative and postoperative rehabilitation, and (4) preferred timing of RTS and evaluation prior to RTS discharge. Results: Of all 85 Australian Knee Society members contacted, 86% (n = 73) responded. Overall, 66 respondents (90.4%) preferentially used hamstring tendon autografts. All surgeons estimated their retear rate to be ≤15%, with 31 (42.5%) <5%. Twenty-eight surgeons (38.4%) reported no benefit in preoperative rehabilitation. The majority of surgeons (82.2%–94.5%) reported that postoperative rehabilitation was important within various periods throughout the postoperative timeline. Most surgeons did not permit RTS until ≥9 months (n = 56, 76.7%), with 17 (23.3%) allowing RTS between 6 and 9 months. The most highly reported considerations for RTS clearance were time (90.4%), functional capacity (90.4%), and strength (78.1%). Most commonly, knee strength and/or function was assessed via referral to a preferred rehabilitation specialist (50.7%) or with the surgeon at their practice (11.0%). Conclusions: This survey revealed variation in beliefs and practices surrounding rehabilitation and RTS evaluation. This is despite the current evidence demonstrating the benefit of preoperative and postoperative rehabilitation, as well as the emerging potential of RTS assessments consisting of strength and functional measures to reduce reinjury rates.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document