Since transplantation of meniscal allograft or artificial menisci is limited by graft sources and a series of adverse events, substitution for meniscus reconstruction still needs to be explored. Natural biomaterials, which can provide a unique 3-D microenvironment, remain a promising alternative for tissue engineering. Among them, autograft is a preferred option for its safety and excellent biocompatibility. In this study, we utilized semitendinosus tendon autograft in meniscus reconstruction to investigate its fibrochondrogenic metaplasticity potential and chondroprotective effect. Tendon-derived stem cells (TDSCs) and synovial-derived mesenchymal stem cells (SMSCs), two most important stem cell sources in our strategy, exhibited excellent viability, distribution, proliferation and fibrochondrogenic differentiation ability in decellularized semitendinosus tendon (DST) scaffolds in vitro. Histologic evaluation of the tendon grafts in vivo suggested endogenous stem cells differentiated into fibrochondrocytes, synthesized proteoglycan, type II collagen and radial type I collagen at 12 weeks and 24 weeks post-surgery. As for elastic modulus and hardness of the grafts, there were no significant differences between native meniscus and regenerated meniscus at 24 weeks. The protection of condylar cartilage from degeneration was significantly better in the reconstruction group comparing to control group. Overall, semitendinosus tendon autograft seems to be a promising substitution in meniscus reconstruction.

BackgroundCompared with standard anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, it is controversial whether anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with remnant preservation can lead to better clinical outcomes. We conducted a systematic study and meta-analysis to assess the differences in clinical efficacy between the two.MethodWe searched for clinical randomized controlled studies and cohort studies included in the Cochrane library, PubMed, and Embase from March 2012 to March 2022 in English. The included studies were ACLR with or without remant preservation, and the data were extracted and the quality of the included studies was assessed by two authors, respectively. Revman 5.4 was used for statistical analysis and conclusions were presented.ResultTen articles containing a total of 777 patients were finally included. There was no significant difference in postoperative Lachman test [OR = 1.66, 95%CI (0.79, 3.49), P = 0.18 > 0.05], Tegner score [SMD = −0.13, 95%CI (−0.47, 0.22), P = 0.46 > 0.05], synovial coverage rate by second-look arthroscopy [OR = 1.55, 95%CI (0.66, 3.65), P = 0.32 > 0.05], the rate of cyclops lesion [OR = 3.92, 95%CI (0.53, 29.29), P = 0.18 > 0.05], joint range of motion [SMD = 0.27, 95%CI (−0.13, 0.68), P = 0.19 > 0.05] and re-injury rate [OR = 0.57, 95%CI (0.18, 1.74), P = 0.32 > 0.05] between the two groups. There were statistically significant differences in postoperative Lysholm score [SMD = 0.98, 95% CI (0.32, 1.64), P = 0.004 < 0.05], International Knee Documantation Committee grade (IKDC grade) [OR = 2.19, 95%CI (1.03, 4.65), P = 0.04 < 0.05], Pivot shift test [OR = 1.71, 95%CI (1.06, 2.77), P = 0.03 < 0.05], KT1000/2000 arthrometer side-to-side difference [SMD = −0.22, 95%CI (−0.42, −0.03), P = 0.02 < 0.05], operation time [SMD = 11.69, 95%CI (8.85, 14.54), P = 0.00001 < 0.05] and degree of tibial tunnel enlargement [SMD = −0.66, 95%CI (−1.08, −0.23), P = 0.002 < 0.05].ConclusionThis meta-analysis concluded that remnant preservation significantly had better results in terms of patient functional score (Lysholm, IKDC), knee stability (Pivot shift test, postoperative side-to-side anterior laxity) and tibial tunnel enlargement. In terms of complications (incidence of Cyclops lesions, range of motion, re-injury rate), no significant differences were seen between the two groups. Although many studies concluded that remnant preservation could bring better synovial coverage, this meta-analysis indicated that there is insufficient evidence to support it, possibly due to different remnant preservation procedures.The potential risks associated with longer operation times are also worth considering.

Objective: To investigate the clinical and radiographic short-term results of arthroscopic treatment for posterior labrum tears with an attached bony fragment after traumatic posterior hip dislocation.Methods: Between July 2014 and May 2019, a consecutive series of nine patients diagnosed with a posterior labrum tear with an attached bony fragment after traumatic posterior hip dislocation were treated by hip arthroscopic techniques. The patients had been injured in traffic accidents (n = 6) or high falls (n = 3). All patients were provided primary treatment at the emergency department of our institution, and then were transferred to our department for arthroscopy. Demographic data (e.g. gender, age, etc), intraoperative findings, the preoperative and postoperative multiple clinical scores and radiological results were subsequently assessed. Visual analogue scale for pain (VAS) and modified Harris hip scores (mHHSs) were measured and compared before surgery, and at the last follow-up.Results: A total of nine patients were enrolled, all of them were male, with a mean age at surgery of 32.2 AE 5.6 years (range, 22-65 years). The patients were followed-up for an average of 26.5 AE 4.1 (range, 24 to 50 years). During the arthroscopic surgery, all patients had labral tears with posterior acetabular rim fracture. All patients had loose osteochondral fragments. Five had partial or complete tears of ligamentum teres. Two patients had osteochondral damage. Two had capsular rupture. Postoperative X-ray films and three dimension computed tomography (3D-CT) showed satisfactory reduction of posterior acetabular wall fractures. The mHHS before surgery and at 1 year and 2 years after surgery were 51.8 AE 4.3, 81.8 AE 2.0 and 87.5 AE 1.9 respectively; VAS scores were 5.6 AE 0.5, 1.3 AE 0.3 and 0.7 AE 0.3 respectively. As compared with the condition before surgery, there was a significant improvement in the mHHS and VAS scores at 1 year and 2 years after surgery (P < 0.01). There was no significant improvement in the mHHS and VAS scores between 1 year and 2 years after surgery (P < 0.05). At the final follow-up, all patients had regained full range of motion (ROM) and were satisfied with the results. None of the patients showed signs of heterotopic ossification, avascular necrosis or progression of osteoarthritis of the hip joint. Conclusion:Traumatic dislocation is accompanied by a variety of intra-articular hip joint pathologies. Managing posterior acetabular rim fracture after traumatic posterior hip dislocation using arthroscopic reduction and fixation with anchors is a safe and minimally invasive option and delays the progression of traumatic osteoarthritis.

Anterior cruciate ligament injury is the most common sports injury in orthopaedics, which can adversely affect knee joint function and exercise of patients. Using arthroscopy to reconstruct the anterior cruciate ligament has become the first choice for treating anterior cruciate ligament rupture. However, different degrees of articular cartilage injury of the knee can be observed in patients after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. More importantly, the articular cartilage injury after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction indicates that it will develop into osteoarthritis in the long term. It is of great significance to fully understand the factors that lead to the occurrence and development of cartilage injury. This article reviews the effects of surgical methods, meniscus status, different grafts, time from injury to surgical intervention, postoperative knee joint stability, postoperative rehabilitation, knee joint anatomical factors, and demographic characteristics of patients on articular cartilage degeneration after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The present review provides insights into the anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, which can be used to investigate new treatment strategies to delay and prevent the progress of osteoarthritis. At the same time, it provides a holistic understanding of the influence of multiple factors on cartilage lesions after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.