Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Satisfactory outcomes have been reported after all-inside meniscus ramp repair with combined anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). However, clinical outcomes after ACLR with inside-out meniscus ramp repair are limited.Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient-reported outcomes for patients who underwent ACLR and medial meniscus ramp repair compared with those who underwent isolated ACLR; patients in the 2 groups were matched for age, sex, and sport/activity. The null hypothesis was that there would be no significant differences in clinical outcomes between groups at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively.Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence 3. Methods:Patients who underwent primary ACLR with bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft by a single surgeon were retrospectively identified. A subgroup of patients with combined ACLR and meniscus ramp repair with a minimum 2-year postoperative follow-up were matched to a cohort who underwent isolated ACLR. Subjective patient-reported questionnaires, knee stability, and return to level of activity/sport were collected.Results: There were 851 patients who underwent primary ACLR; of these, 158 (18.6%) had medial meniscus ramp lesions confirmed at arthroscopy. The most common clinical characteristics in patients with ramp lesions were chronic injuries (68.4%), contact mechanism (88%), concomitant lateral meniscus tears (63.2%), and concomitant lateral meniscus posterior root tears (22.2%). Further, 50 patients who underwent combined ACLR and meniscus ramp repair with minimum 2-year follow-up were matched to patients who underwent isolated ACLR. Both groups reported significant improvements in subjective outcomes from preoperative to postoperative assessments (P < .001). No significant differences were found in postoperative outcomes for combined ACLR with ramp repair versus isolated ACLR (P > .05). Patients with meniscus ramp repair had increased preoperative knee laxity demonstrated by grade 3 Lachman (44% vs 6%) and pivot-shift (38% vs 12%) test results compared with patients who underwent isolated ACLR (P .005 for both). Conclusion:This study demonstrates similar clinical outcomes, knee stability on postoperative physical examination, and returnto-sport rates for patients who underwent combined ACLR with BPTB autograft and inside-out meniscus ramp repair versus a matched cohort who underwent isolated ACLR. Clinicians should have a high index of suspicion for the presence of ramp lesions in patients with ACL tears who have a contact mechanism of injury, grade 3 Lachman test result, and concomitant lateral meniscal abnormality.

Level IV, retrospective case series.

Increased sagittal plane posterior tibial slope has been identified as a risk factor for primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) failure. Although ACLR failure is multifactorial, correction of sagittal plane posterior tibial slope should be evaluated in patients with an ACLR graft rupture. There are limited technical descriptions of proposed decreasing tibial slope osteotomy procedures; therefore, the purpose of this Technical Note is to describe the current senior author's technique of performing an anterior closing wedge proximal tibial osteotomy to decrease sagittal plane tibial slope in patients requiring a revision ACLR.

➢ Osteochondral lesions of the talus remain difficult pathological entities to treat and require the utilization of a combination of conventional radiographs, computed tomographic scans, and magnetic resonance images to determine osseous involvement. Along with the size of the lesion, these characteristics will dictate the treatment required to obtain a satisfactory clinical result.➢ Operative treatment should be reserved for patients who have mechanical symptoms following an acute osteochondral lesion of the talus or who are not satisfied with the result after 3 to 6 months of nonoperative treatment.➢ The gold standard of operative treatment for lesions measuring <1.5 cm2 remains microfracture. Repair, replacement, or regenerative procedures should be considered for patients with refractory lesions or larger lesions.