BackgroundA few small studies have reported on the mechanisms of ACL injury in professional male football.AimTo describe the mechanisms, situational patterns and biomechanics (kinematics) of ACL injuries in professional male football matches.MethodsWe identified 148 consecutive ACL injuries across 10 seasons of professional Italian football. 134 (90%) injury videos were analysed for mechanism and situational pattern, while biomechanical analysis was possible in 107 cases. Three independent reviewers evaluated each video. ACL injury epidemiology (month), timing within the match and pitch location at the time of injury were also reported.Results59 (44%) injuries were non-contact, 59 (44%) were indirect contact and 16 (12%) were direct contact. Players were frequently perturbed immediately prior to injury. We identified four main situational patterns for players who suffered a non-contact or an indirect contact injury: (1) pressing and tackling (n=55); (2) tackled (n=24); (3) regaining balance after kicking (n=19); and (4) landing from a jump (n=8). Knee valgus loading (n=83, 81%) was the dominant injury pattern across all four of these situational patterns (86%, 86%, 67% and 50%, respectively). 62% of the injuries occurred in the first half of the matches (p<0.01). Injuries peaked at the beginning of the season (September–October) and were also higher at the end of the season (March–May).Conclusions88% of ACL injuries occurred without direct knee contact, but indirect contact injuries were as frequent as non-contact injuries, underlying the importance of mechanical perturbation. The most common situational patterns were pressing, being tackled and kicking.

Studied surgical technique demonstrated good results in laxity control at 20-year minimum follow-up. The lateral extra-articular plasty associated with ACL reconstruction did not generate lateral knee or patellofemoral osteoarthritis. The factor increasing osteoarthritis was meniscectomy.

Background: Tibiofemoral anatomic parameters, such as tibial slope, femoral condyle shape, and anterior tibial subluxation, have been suggested to increase the risk of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction failure. However, such features have never been assessed among patients experiencing multiple failures of ACL reconstruction. Purpose: To compare the knee anatomic features of patients experiencing a single failure of ACL reconstruction with those experiencing multiple failures or with intact ACL reconstruction. Study: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Twenty-six patients who experienced failure of revision ACL reconstruction were included in the multiple-failure group. These patients were matched to a group of 25 patients with failure of primary ACL reconstruction and to a control group of 40 patients who underwent primary ACL reconstruction with no failure at a minimum follow-up of 24 months. On magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the following parameters were evaluated: ratio between the height and depth of the lateral and medial femoral condyles, the lateral and medial tibial plateau slopes, and anterior subluxation of the lateral and medial tibial plateaus with respect to the femoral condyle. The presence of a meniscal lesion during each procedure was evaluated as well. Anatomic, demographic, and surgical characteristics were compared among the 3 groups. Results: The patients in the multiple-failure group had significantly higher values of lateral tibial plateau slope ( P < .001), medial tibial plateau slope ( P < .001), lateral tibial plateau subluxation ( P < .001), medial tibial plateau subluxation ( P < .001), and lateral femoral condyle height/depth ratio ( P = .038) as compared with the control group and the failed ACL reconstruction group. Moreover, a significant direct correlation was found between posterior tibial slope and anterior tibial subluxation for the lateral ( r = 0.325, P = .017) and medial ( r = 0.421, P < .001) compartments. An increased anterior tibial subluxation of 2 to 3 mm was present in patients with a meniscal defect at the time of the MRI as compared with patients who had an intact meniscus for both the lateral and the medial compartments. Conclusion: A steep posterior tibial slope and an increased depth of the lateral femoral condyle represent a common finding among patients who experience multiple ACL failures. Moreover, higher values of anterior subluxation were found among patients with repeated failure and those with a medial or lateral meniscal defect.

Objective To evaluate effectiveness, in terms of patient-reported outcome measures, of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for knee osteoarthritis compared to placebo and other intraarticular treatments. Design PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, as well as the gray literature were searched on January 17, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PRP injections with placebo or other injectable treatments, in any language, on humans, were included. Risk of bias was assessed following the Cochrane guidelines; quality of evidence was graded using the GRADE guidelines. Results Thirty-four RCTs, including 1403 knees in PRP groups and 1426 in control groups, were selected. WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) score favored PRP, with a statistically and clinically significant difference versus placebo at 12-month follow-up ( P = 0.02) and versus HA (hyaluronic acid) at 6-month ( P < 0.001) and 12-month ( P < 0.001) follow-ups. A clinically significant difference favoring PRP versus steroids was documented for VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) pain ( P < 0.001), KOOS (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) pain ( P < 0.001), function in daily activities ( P = 0.001), and quality of life ( P < 0.001) at 6-month follow-up. However, superiority of PRP did not reach the minimal clinically important difference for all outcomes, and quality of evidence was low. Conclusions The effect of platelet concentrates goes beyond its mere placebo effect, and PRP injections provide better results than other injectable options. This benefit increases over time, being not significant at earlier follow-ups but becoming clinically significant after 6 to 12 months. However, although substantial, the improvement remains partial and supported by low level of evidence. This finding urges further research to confirm benefits and identify the best formulation and indications for PRP injections in knee OA.