Background: The adductor canal block (ACB) has emerged as an alternative to the femoral nerve block (FNB) after total knee arthroplasty. This meta-analysis was conducted to investigate which ACB method provides better pain relief and functional recovery after total knee arthroplasty Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis to identify randomized controlled trials involving single-shot adductor canal block (SACB) and continuous catheter ACB (CACB) after TKA up to December 2019 by searching databases including the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang databases. Finally, we included 8 randomized controlled trials involving 702 knees in our study. We used Review Manager Software and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation profiler to perform the meta-analysis. Results: Compared with SACB, CACB can achieve better postoperative pain relief at 24 and 48 h both at rest and after mobilization, lower amount of opioid consumption at 72 h, a shorter length of hospital stay (LOH) and larger range of motion (ROM). In addition, the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test results; quadriceps strength; and incidence of complications, including postoperative nausea and vomiting, DVT, catheter-related infections, catheter dislodgement and neurologic deficits, showed no significant difference between the two ACB methods. Conclusion: The results of this study demonstrate that CACB is an effective alternative to SACB and can provide better pain relief, a shorter LOH, more degrees of maximum flexion and a lower amount of opioid consumption over time, but it provides a comparable level of recovery of quadriceps strength and mobility with a similar risk of catheter-related complications. Thus, CACB may be a better analgesia strategy than SACB after TKA at present.

Newer methods of wound closure such as barbed sutures hold the potential to reduce closure time and equivalent wound complications in various surgeries. However, few studies have compared barbed suture and conventional wound closure techniques in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this review was to appraise the efficacy and safety of the barbed suture in closure of TKA. We conducted a meta-analysis to identify relevant randomized-controlled trials involving barbed sutures and conventional sutures in TKA in electronic databases, including Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Library, Highwire, CBM, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang database, up to August 2019. Finally, we identified 1,472 TKAs (1,270 patients) assessed in 13 randomized-controlled trials. Compared with conventional wound closure techniques, barbed sutures resulted in shorter total wound closure time (p < 0.001), fewer needle puncture injuries to members of the surgical team (p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in terms of blister formation (p = 1.0), superficial infection (p = 0.82), range of motion (p = 0.94), incisional exudate (p = 0.75), suture abscess (p = 0.26), or suture breakage (p = 0.11), wound-related complications (p = 0.10), ecchymosis (p = 0.08) between barbed and conventional wound closure. Based on the available level I evidence, we thus conclude that a knotless barbed suture is a safe and effective approach for wound closure in TKA. Given the relevant possible biases in our meta-analysis, more adequately powered and better-designed randomized-controlled trials studies with long-term follow-up are required to recommend barbed sutures for routine administration in TKA.

AbstractsMultiple surgical techniques exist to repair iatrogenic medial collateral ligament (MCL) injury during total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The objective of the study is to confirm the clinical effectiveness of meniscus transfer for treatment of iatrogenic MCL midsubstance transection in which remaining MCL is of poor quality, and there is a persistent gap between both ligament ends during TKA. From January 2015 to November 2019, we treated 11 patients with MCL injuries of 882 primary TKAs by meniscus transfer. Another 24 primary TKAs were recruited as a control group. The two groups of patients were comparable for age, gender, body mass index (BMI), Knee Society scoring (KSS), knee function score (KFS), and type of prosthesis comparison without significant difference (p > 0.05). We reviewed the patient's stability, as well as objective measures such as KSS and KFS scores, physical examinations, and radiographs. No patient of either group reported impaired wound healing, joint instability on physical examination, pain, radiographic changes, signs of loosening, and other complications. At the final follow-up, there was no significant difference in terms of KSS (p = 0.780) and KFS (p = 0.612) between the injury group and control group at last follow-up. X-ray image review showed no prosthesis loosening or subsidence for both groups. Based on these results, we are cautiously optimistic that midsubstance transections in which the quality of remaining tendon is weak, there is suspicion of stretching, or there is a persistent gap between both ligament ends that can be reconstructed with meniscus autograft transfer augmentation and an unconstrained implant.