Context: There are 3.8 million mild traumatic brain injuries (mTBIs) that occur each year in the United States. Many are left with prolonged life-altering neurocognitive deficits, including difficulties in attention, concentration, mental fatigue, and distractibility. With extensive data on the safety and efficacy of stimulant medications in treating attention deficit, concentration difficulties and distractibility seen with attention deficit disorder, it is not surprising that interest continues regarding the application of stimulant medications for the persistent neurocognitive deficits in some mTBIs. Evidence Acquisition: Studies were extracted from PubMed based on the topics of neurocognitive impairment, mTBI, stimulant use in mTBI, stimulants, and the association between attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and mTBI. The search criteria included a date range of 1999 to 2020 in the English language. Study Design: Literature review. Level of Evidence: Level 4. Results: Currently, there is very limited literature, and no guidelines for evaluating the use of stimulant medication for the treatment of prolonged neurocognitive impairments due to mTBI. However, a limited number of studies have demonstrated efficacy and safety of stimulants in the treatment of neurocognitive sequelae of mTBI in the adult, pediatric, military, and athletic populations. Conclusion: There is limited evidence to suggest stimulant medication may be beneficial in patients with mTBI with persistent neurocognitive symtpoms. The decision to utilize stimulant medication for mTBI patients remains physician and patient preference dependent. Given the limited encouraging data currently available, physicians may consider stimulant medication in appropriate patients to facilitate the recovery of prolonged neurocognitive deficits, while remaining cognizant of potential adverse effects.

No abstract

No abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes of Prochondrix® novel thin, laser-etched osteochondral allograft on isolated articular cartilage defects. Methods: Eighteen patients with isolated, symptomatic, full-thickness articular cartilage lesions were treated with marrow stimulation followed by placement of a T-LE allograft. Demographic and intra-operative data was recorded as well as pre- and post-operative International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Short Form-36 (SF-36), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Tegner scores. Pre- and post-operative data was compared at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months post operatively. Failures requiring reoperation were also recorded. Results: At a mean follow-up of 2.5 years (6–43 months), VAS decreased from 6.55 to 2.55 ( p = .02) and subjective IKDC scores increased from 37.61 to 59.65 ( p = .02). Statistically significant increases were also seen in KOOS Function-Sports and Recreational Activities (+26.04, p = .04) and KOOS QOL (+18.76, p = .007) as well as in SF-36 Physical Functioning (+25.20, p = .04), Energy/Fatigue (+16.50, p = .02), Social Functioning (+11.79, p = .04), and Bodily Pain (+25.18, p = .04). There were two failures requiring reoperation: one conversion to a patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA), and one graft dislodgement which required removal. Conclusion: Treatment of articular cartilage lesions of the knee with ProChondrix® has demonstrated sustained positive results out to a mean follow-up of two and a half years in this prospective case series with a low failure rate that required reoperation (2 patients) in this series. These results are comparable to the short-term results of other cartilage restoration procedures currently in use today. A meta-analysis of osteochondral allografting demonstrated a mean 86.7% survival rate at 5 years with significant improvements in clinical outcome scores reaching MCID values.