Many patients, particularly those aged above 40, experience knee joint pain, which hampers both sports activities and daily living. Treating isolated chondral and osteochondral defects in the knee poses a significant clinical challenge, particularly in younger patients who are not typically recommended partial or total knee arthroplasty as alternatives. Several surgical approaches have been developed to address focal cartilage defects. The treatment strategies are characterized as palliation (e.g., chondroplasty and debridement), repair (e.g., drilling and microfracture), or restoration (e.g., autologous chondrocyte implantation, osteochondral autograft, and osteochondral allograft). This review offers an overview of the commonly employed clinical methods for treating articular cartilage defects, with a specific focus on the clinical trials conducted in the last decade. Our study reveals that, currently, no single technology fully meets the essential requirements for effective cartilage healing while remaining easily applicable during surgical procedures. Nevertheless, numerous methods are available, and the choice of treatment should consider factors such as the location and size of the cartilage lesion, patient preferences, and whether it is chondral or osteochondral in nature. Promising directions for the future include tissue engineering, stem cell therapies, and the development of pre-formed scaffolds from hyaline cartilage, offering hope for improved outcomes.

Background: Appropriate patient-reported outcome measures are paramount to determine the clinical relevance of change experienced by patients after a surgical procedure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric properties of 3 patient-reported outcome measures (Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [HOOS], modified Harris hip score, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]) in a large population of patients treated with periacetabular osteotomy for symptomatic developmental dysplasia of the hip. Methods: Patients who underwent a periacetabular osteotomy for acetabular dysplasia between October 2011 and October 2016 completed multiple questionnaires preoperatively and at the 1-year follow-up. Internal consistency for subscores was evaluated with the Cronbach alpha. Validity was assessed against the Short Form-12. Interpretability included the calculation of the distribution of scores, floor and ceiling effects, and the minimal clinically important difference. Responsiveness was assessed by correlating the score changes with the Global Perceived Effect score. Results: Of 294 patients, 246 (84%) were female. The median age was 21 years (interquartile range, 17 to 29 years). All WOMAC and HOOS subscores demonstrated adequate internal consistency, and none of the modified Harris hip score components did. All scores except the WOMAC stiffness score exhibited adequate validity and interpretability, with no floor and ceiling effects over 15%. For the HOOS subscores, the minimal clinically important difference was 10.3 for pain, 10.2 for symptoms, 12.6 for sports and recreation, 11.2 for quality of life, and 10.8 for activities of daily living. The minimal clinically important difference for the modified Harris hip score was 7.4. For the WOMAC subscores, the minimal clinically important difference was 10.8 for pain, 12.9 for stiffness, 10.8 for physical, and 10.4 for total. All scores demonstrated adequate responsiveness. Conclusions: The HOOS, WOMAC, and modified Harris hip score have adequate psychometric properties for use in patients undergoing periacetabular osteotomy, with minor shortcomings. Among the scores analyzed, the HOOS appears to be the most appropriate measure of patient-reported outcome in patients undergoing periacetabular osteotomy. Clinical Relevance: By establishing the psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for periacetabular osteotomy, this study enables a more informed choice of measures for clinical practice and research. The estimated minimal clinically important difference values will facilitate understanding the importance of change in patient-reported outcomes after a surgical procedure in a clinical setting and sample size calculation for further studies.

Background: The aim of this study was to identify an inflammatory marker with fast and predictable kinetics to enable future discrimination between normal postoperative inflammation and potential infection after total hip and knee arthroplasty cases. Methods: Changes in serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukins (IL) 1β, 6 and 8 and NT-proCNP peptide were measured before and during first 5 postoperative days in 100 patients undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty. We also compared two methods to describe the magnitude of inflammation – applying separate two sample tests at each time point, and summary measures – area under the curve (AUC). Results: IL-6 showed a similar kinetics pattern to the CRP in response to surgical trauma. Significantly greater level changes in all markers but NT-proCNP were observed in knee patients. Persisting high levels of CRP, but not other markers, were observed in obese hip patients. IL-6 was found to be an adjunct to routine CRP use. Conclusions: IL-6 has faster kinetics and is less influenced by patient weight, therefore it seems to be more useful in clinical practice. Summary measures describe the inflammatory response well and are easier to analyze than multiple analyses of single time points.

Aseptic loosening remains the most significant long‐term complication of total hip replacement. The current paradigm points to an inflammatory response to wear particles as its main trigger. Recently, there have been increasing numbers of positive bacterial isolates reported among patients with clinically absent infection. This paper reviews existing evidence on possible involvement of bacteria and microbial‐associated molecular patterns in the pathology of so‐called “aseptic loosening.” © 2016 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 34:1497–1504, 2016.

Since the first description in 2002 by Paley and Herzenberg, antibiotic bone cement nails (ACNs) have become an effective tool in the orthopaedic trauma surgeons’ hands. They simultaneously elute high amounts of antibiotics into medullary canal dead space and provide limited stability to the debrided long bone. In this paper, we perform a systematic review of current evidence on ACNs in orthopaedic trauma and provide an up-to-date review of the indications, operative technique, failure mechanisms, complications, outcomes, and outlooks for the ACNs use in long bone infection.