Background and Objectives: The present systematic review investigated the efficacy of lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) and anterolateral ligament (ALL) as lateral extra-articular procedures (LEAPs) for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. ACL reconstruction using LEAP may reduce graft rupture and rotatory laxity and allow a quicker return to sports. The outcomes of interest were patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), return to sport, laxity, failure rate, and safety profile. Materials and Methods: The present systematic review followed the 2020 PRISMA guidelines. In December 2024, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were accessed without constraints. All clinical investigations evaluating LEAP for ACL reconstruction were considered. Only studies that considered LET and ALL as LEAP were considered. Only studies using a hamstring tendon autograft associated with LET or ALL were considered. Results: Data from 27 clinical studies (3423 patients) were retrieved. The mean length of follow-up was 61.8 ± 39.5 months. ACL reconstruction using LEAP led to a statistically significant improvement in the Lysholm score (p < 0.01) and IKDC (p < 0.01). The mean joint laxity, as measured by the arthrometer, was 1.5 ± 1.8 mm. Finally, 72.3% (623 of 668) of patients returned to their pre-injury level of sport at a mean of 6.3 ± 4.4 months. At the last follow-up, the LET group showed greater IKDC (p = 0.04). On the other hand, there was a statistically significant greater rate of patients positive to the Lachman test (p < 0.01), return to sport (p < 0.01), and reoperation (p = 0.01). No significant differences were found in Lysholm scores (p = 0.6), Tegner scores (p = 0.2), arthrometer measurements (p = 0.2), Pivot shift test results (p = 0.1), time to return to sport (p = 0.3), and failure rates (p = 0.7). Conclusions: LEAP for ACL reconstructions seems to be effective and safe. Most patients returned to their pre-injury level of sport after a mean of 6 months. LET-based ACL reconstruction may be associated with greater clinical outcomes and a higher reoperation rate compared to ALL-based reconstruction.

Background: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is common. The present systematic review updates the current evidence on return to sport (RTS) in patients who have undergone arthroscopic surgery for FAI in any of its variants (CAM, pincer, or both). Methods: The outcomes of interest were sports-related patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and the level and time to RTS. All available clinical studies concerning the RTS following arthroscopic management of FAI were considered. In July 2024, the following databases were accessed following the PRISMA guidelines: Embase, Web of Science, and PubMed. Only studies with a minimum of six months of follow-up were eligible. Results: From 1245 initially identified articles, 43 studies (4103 patients) met the inclusion criteria, in which 32.1% (1317 of 4103 patients) were women. The mean length of follow-up was 33.7 ± 15.8 months. The mean age was 28.1 ± 7.2 years, the mean BMI was 24.7 ± 6.4 kg/m², and 79.6% ± 27.8% of patients returned to sport at the same or higher level at a mean of 14.3 ± 9.6 months. The mean time away from sports was 8.0 ± 3.3 months. Conclusion: Arthroscopic management for FAI leads to a high rate of RTS, with approximately 80% of patients returning to their preinjury level. Future research should focus on standardised definitions of RTS, sport-specific rehabilitation protocols, and the influence of deformity and procedures on RTS.

Focal chondral defects of the knee are a common cause of pain and functional limitation in active individuals and may predispose to early degenerative joint changes. Given the limited regenerative capacity of hyaline cartilage, biologically based surgical strategies have emerged to promote tissue repair and restore joint function. This narrative review critically examines current treatment approaches that rely on autologous cell sources and scaffold-supported regeneration. Particular emphasis is placed on techniques that stimulate endogenous repair or support chondrocyte-based tissue restoration through the use of autologous biomaterial constructs. The influence of lesion morphology, joint biomechanics, and patient-specific variables on treatment selection is discussed in detail, focusing on the differences between tibiofemoral and patellofemoral involvement. Biologically driven approaches have shown promising mid- to long-term outcomes in selected patients, and are increasingly favoured over traditional methods in specific clinical scenarios. However, the literature remains limited by heterogeneity in study design, follow-up duration, and outcome measures. This review aims to provide an evidence-based, morphology-informed framework to support the clinical decision-making process in the management of knee cartilage defects.

Introduction: Managing sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain is challenging and unpredictable. There are no internationally accepted recommendations. In light of the lack of global consensus and guidelines and the ongoing advancements in management options, a widely accepted treatment algorithm remains absent. This systematic review updates and evaluates the existing evidence on strategies for managing SIJ pain. Methods: This study followed the guidelines defined in the 2020 PRISMA statement. All clinical studies concerning the clinical management of SIJ pain were considered. Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase were accessed in January 2025 without additional filters or temporal constraints. The risk of bias evaluation and statistical analysis followed the guidelines described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Results: Fifteen randomised controlled trials, 13 clinical trials, and 10 retrospective studies were included. Data from 2666 patients (1429 women) were retrieved. The mean length of follow-up was 14.7 ± 15.2 months. The mean age was 54.0 ± 5.8 years, and the mean BMI was 28.5 ± 2.5 kg/m ² . Non-surgical options primarily focus on physical therapy to relieve discomfort. Different medications aim to decrease inflammation and pain at the SIJ. Fluoroscopically guided SIJ injections allow for directly administering steroids or mesenchymal stem cells into the joint. Radiofrequency denervation is frequently used to address SIJ pain, while surgical fusion is usually reserved for cases where conservative treatment is ineffective. Conclusion: Managing SIJ pain is challenging due to limited and inconsistent evidence. Treatment progresses from conservative options, physiotherapy, lifestyle changes, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs to more invasive approaches like injections, radiofrequency denervation, and, in severe cases, surgical management. Research limitations include small sample sizes, short follow-ups, and inconsistent methodologies. Future high-quality studies are needed to establish clear diagnostic and treatment guidelines, compare techniques, and explore new therapies like regenerative medicine.

Background: Postoperative pain management after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is crucial for promoting early recovery. Advances in pain management techniques have significantly improved outcomes after TKA. Recently, multimodal analgesia has emerged as a key concept in pain management following TKA, using regional anaesthesia to reduce narcotic use and minimise narcotic-related side effects. This Bayesian network meta-analysis compared different treatment options for the management of postoperative pain following primary TKA. Methods: This study was conducted following the 2020 PRISMA statement. In January 2025, all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) related to postoperative pain management following TKA were accessed. Pain reported on postoperative days (PODs) 1–3 was evaluated. Results: Data from 7199 patients were retrieved. Of these, 63.2% (4232 of 6691) were women, and the mean age was 66.7 ± 3.1 years. The mean length of follow-up was 10.2 ± 18.3 weeks. At baseline, comparability was confirmed for age (p = 0.1), BMI (p = 0.8), and visual analogue scale (VAS, p = 0.1). On POD 1, single-shot SNB/three-in-one block was associated with a lower VAS, followed by continuous intra-articular analgesia/local infiltration analgesia (LIA)/posterior capsule infiltration (PCI) and continuous femoral nerve block (FNB)/intermittent SNB. On POD 2, continuous intra-articular analgesia/LIA/PCI was associated with a lower VAS, followed by continuous FNB/PCI and single-shot femoral triangle block (FTB)/single-shot infiltration between the popliteal artery and capsule of the knee (IPACK). On POD 3, continuous ACB was associated with a lower VAS, followed by continuous intra-articular analgesia/LIA/PCI and continuous FNB/PCI. Conclusions: Continuous intra-articular analgesia/LIA/PCI was associated with the best pain control following primary TKA. Multimodal analgesia, which incorporates peripheral nerve blockade and periarticular injections, has become a key concept in contemporary pain management following TKA.

Background: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a frequently observed hip condition among young, active individuals—especially athletes—that can result in pain, restricted mobility, and a heightened risk of osteoarthritis. Hip arthroscopy has increasingly become the preferred surgical approach for managing FAI due to its ability to alleviate symptoms and improve function. However, potential differences in outcomes between athletes and non-athletes have not been thoroughly investigated. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared arthroscopic management for FAI in athletes versus non-athletes. The outcomes of interest were patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complications. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were systematically accessed until October 2024. The studies eligible were clinical investigations comparing athletes and non-athletes undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. The outcomes assessed included the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Hip Outcome Score for Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), and the Hip Outcome Score–Sport-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS). Data on reoperation rates and progression to total hip arthroplasty were also extracted. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess the risk of bias, and meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.3. Results: Three comparative investigations, comprising 808 patients (165 athletes and 643 non-athletes), met the inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics were similar across both groups. The analyses demonstrated no statistically significant differences in the PROMs (VAS: p = 0.7; HOS-ADL: p = 0.5; HOS-SSS: p = 0.4), reoperation rates (p = 0.7), or the rate of progression to arthroplasty (p = 0.4) between athletes and non-athletes. Furthermore, meta-analyses of two studies reinforced the absence of significant differences in VAS and HOS-SSS outcomes. Conclusion: Hip arthroscopy for FAI appears to yield equivalent improvements in pain and functional outcomes for both athletes and non-athletes, with comparable complication rates at an approximate two-year follow-up. Despite the limited number of studies and a moderate risk of bias, the findings support the effectiveness of arthroscopic intervention across varying physical activity levels.