Background: An ankle sprain is a frequent musculoskeletal injury, often leading to chronic instability and an increased risk of post-traumatic osteoarthritis. Kinesio Tape, an elastic adhesive tape, is widely used in rehabilitation for its supposed benefits in reducing pain, controlling edema, and improving ankle function. However, its effectiveness in managing acute ankle sprains remains debated. Methods: This systematic review aims to evaluate the evidence on the impact of Kinesio Taping on pain reduction, edema control, and return to sport in patients with acute ankle sprains. A systematic review was conducted in line with the PRISMA guidelines. The literature from PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library was searched for studies published from 2004 to 2024. Seven studies met the inclusion criteria, involving 247 patients with acute ankle sprains. Data on patient demographics, follow-up duration, Kinesio Taping protocols, and clinical outcomes were extracted and analyzed. Results: The review revealed mixed findings. Some studies reported short-term pain relief and reduced need for analgesics in the Kinesio Taping group, especially when combined with manual therapy. However, no significant differences were found in the edema control compared to bracing or casting. Functional recovery, as assessed by scales like the Karlsson scoring scale, showed no clear advantage for Kinesio Taping over other treatments. Conclusions: Kinesio Taping provides limited benefits for ankle sprain management, particularly in terms of long-term functional recovery and edema reduction. While it may offer short-term pain relief, it should be considered as an adjunctive treatment rather than a primary intervention.

Background: Functional testing after an ankle sprain may help identify patients who later develop mechanical instability and require surgery. This study aimed to identify early clinical and functional predictors of surgical stabilization for chronic ankle instability (CAI) after acute sprains and to develop a simple composite predictive score (TALAR). Methods: This prospective observational study included 197 patients with acute lateral ankle sprains. Comprehensive clinical and functional assessments, including range of motion (ROM), strength, and pain, were performed two weeks post-injury. The primary outcome was subsequent surgical management for instability within a 24-month follow-up period. Results: Eight patients (4%) ultimately underwent surgical stabilization. Univariable analysis identified three significant predictors of surgical outcome: eversion mobility ≥ 20°, plantar flexor strength ≤ 17 kg, and the presence of pain during dorsiflexion (VAS > 0). These variables were integrated into the 0–3 TALAR (Triage Assessment of Lateral Ankle sprain Surgical Risk) score, which demonstrated promising exploratory discrimination with an AUC of 0.889 (95% CI: 0.799–0.954). An optimal cut-off of ≥2 yielded a sensitivity of 0.875 and a specificity of 0.822. While the baseline surgical risk was 4%, patients with a TALAR score ≥2 had a 17.5% conversion rate to surgery, representing a significantly higher risk (OR: 32.24; p < 0.001). Conclusion: The TALAR score represents a promising exploratory tool for early risk stratification after an acute ankle sprain. As an exploratory study, it highlights that early functional red flags, though formal internal and external validation, along with robust calibration on longer follow-up cohorts, are required before clinical implementation.

Background: The role of bone grafting in subtalar joint arthrodesis (SJA) remains controversial. This study aimed to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of SJA performed with and without bone graft and to evaluate the influence of different graft types on fusion and functional results. Methods: A multicenter retrospective observational study was conducted including 66 patients who underwent isolated SJA between 2023 and 2025. Patients were divided into graft ( n = 51) and no graft ( n = 15) groups. A subgroup analysis compared autologous, fresh frozen allogeneic, and commercial allogeneic grafts. Outcomes included osseous union, time to union, complications, and functional scores (AOFAS, FAAM‐ADL, and FAAM‐Sports). Multivariable regression and ROC analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of nonunion and delayed union. Results: Overall, the union rate was 90.9%. Union was achieved in 92.2% of grafted patients and 86.7% of nongrafted patients ( p = 0.612). Bone graft use was not independently associated with union, complications, or time to union in the adjusted exploratory analyses. Increasing age and BMI were independently associated with a prolonged time to union. ROC analysis identified age ≥ 60 years as a predictor of nonunion (AUC 0.782) and age ≥ 59 years and BMI ≥ 25.9 kg/m ² as predictors of delayed union. Both groups showed significant postoperative improvements in all functional scores (all p < 0.001). Autologous graft was associated with higher postoperative functional scores, although this finding should be interpreted cautiously given potential baseline differences and selection bias. Conclusions: In isolated SJA performed in a well‐aligned hindfoot, high union rates and significant functional improvement were achieved regardless of bone graft use. However, due to the retrospective, nonrandomized design and limited number of nonunion events, no definitive conclusions can be drawn regarding the routine necessity or superiority of bone grafting. Though, bone graft use appeared to be associated with improved functional outcomes in selected higher risk patients, although these findings should be interpreted cautiously given the exploratory nature of the analysis. All subgroup and threshold analyses should be interpreted as exploratory.

Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) may plausibly increase this risk because of chronic systemic inflammation, intestinal barrier dysfunction, malnutrition, and exposure to immunosuppressive therapies; however, the available orthopedic literature is sparse and heterogeneous. Methods: This systematic review was revised in accordance with PRISMA 2020 principles and the PRISMA 2020 for Abstracts recommendations. The primary review question was whether patients with IBD undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are at increased risk of PJI or septic revision. Cohort and case–control studies reporting arthroplasty‐related infectious outcomes in patients with Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis, or unspecified IBD were eligible for the primary analysis. To ensure the study is scientifically sound, case reports describing nonprosthetic osteomyelitis were excluded from the primary quantitative analysis and evaluated separately using CARE principles as contextual qualitative evidence. No prospective protocol registration was completed before the original review process. Results: The revised review identified two retrospective cohort studies suitable for the primary analysis and two case reports retained in a separate qualitative appendix. The primary analysis included 22,320 arthroplasty patients with IBD studied against much larger non‐IBD comparator cohorts. One THA registry study found a higher risk of septic revision in patients with IBD, whereas one TKA database study found higher postoperative PJI odds in both Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. Direct quantitative pooling was considered inappropriate because the studies differed in joint type, follow‐up duration, and outcome definition. Conclusions: The currently available evidence suggests that IBD may be associated with an increased risk of infection‐related failure after arthroplasty, but the certainty of evidence is low to very low because only two retrospective cohort studies directly addressed this question. Future research should use standardized PJI definitions, report disease activity and immunosuppressive treatment in detail, and prospectively evaluate whether the excess risk is related to IBD itself or to modifiable perioperative factors.

Severe acetabular bone loss, particularly Paprosky types IIIA and IIIB, remains a major challenge in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). The “cup