Background: Insertional Achilles tendinopathy (IAT) represents a serious challenge for both physiatrists and surgeons. Here we analyse the results obtained by two conservative treatments [platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections and focused extracorporeal shock-wave therapy (ESWT)] in physically active patients with IAT. Methods: During two consecutive periods, 45 consecutive patients with IAT were treated with 3 sessions of ESWT (2400 impulses at 0.17-0.25 mJ/mm 2 per session) (24 cases between September 2011 and July 2013) or with 2 autologous PRP injections over two weeks (21 cases between September 2013 and July 2015). All patients were evaluated at 0, 2-, 4-, 6-month follow-up after therapy. The outcome measures were VISA-A, VAS, Patient Satisfaction. Results: Intra-group analysis showed a significant improvement of VISA-A and VAS scores in both groups at all time-points. No differences between groups were observed for VAS and VISA-A scores at all time-points, excepted for VISA-A at 4-months in favour of ESWT group (P=0.049). Patient satisfaction increased progressively (>70% at 6 months) and with no differences between two groups. Conclusion: Both ESWT and PRP therapy are effective and safe. Our study confirms the success of these conservative treatments in Achilles tendinopathy, even in the insertional one. Level of evidence: IIIa.

SummaryPrimary traumatic patellar dislocation is common, particularly in young active individuals. A consensus on its management is still lacking. The present work provides easily accessible guidelines to be considered as recommendations for a good clinical practice developed through a process of systematic review of the literature and expert opinion, to improve the quality of care and rationalize the use of resources. Level of evidence: Ia.

No abstract

Primary traumatic patellar dislocation is common, particularly in young active individuals. A consensus on its management is still lacking. The present work provides easily accessible guidelines to be considered as recommendations for a good clinical practice developed through a process of systematic review of the literature and expert opinion, to improve the quality of care and rationalize the use of resources. Level of evidence: Ia.