Background: Young patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) are at a particularly high risk of graft ruptures compared with adults. Recent studies have demonstrated significant reductions in ACL graft rupture rates in high-risk adult populations when a lateral extra-articular procedure is performed, but comparative studies in pediatric and adolescent populations are currently lacking in the literature. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of isolated ACLR versus combined ACLR and lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) when using the Arnold-Coker modification of the MacIntosh procedure in early adolescent patients. The hypothesis was that combined procedures would be associated with a significantly reduced risk of graft ruptures. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective analysis of consecutive early adolescent patients who underwent ACLR using a hamstring tendon autograft with or without the Arnold-Coker modification of the MacIntosh procedure was conducted. Patients with ≥1 additional risk factors for a graft rupture were offered LET in addition to ACLR (pivot-shift grade 2 or 3, high level of sporting activity defined as Tegner activity score ≥7, participation in pivoting sports, and Segond fractures). Clinical outcomes including graft rupture rates, patient-reported outcome measure scores (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee), knee stability, return-to-sports rates, reoperation rates, and complications were assessed. Comparisons between variables were assessed with the chi-square or Fisher exact test for categorical variables and the Student or Wilcoxon test for quantitative variables. Multivariate analyses were undertaken to evaluate risk factors for a graft rupture. Results: A total of 111 patients with a mean follow-up of 43.8 ± 17.6 months (range, 24-89 months) were included in the study; 40 patients underwent isolated ACLR, and 71 underwent ACLR + LET. The addition of LET to ACLR was associated with a significantly lower graft rupture rate compared with isolated ACLR (0.0% vs 15.0%, respectively; odds ratio, 15.91 [95% CI, 1.81-139.44]; P = .012). It was also associated with significantly better knee stability (pivot-shift grade 3: 0.0% vs 11.4%, respectively; P = .021) (side-to-side anteroposterior laxity difference >5 mm: 0.0% vs 17.1%, respectively; P = .003) and Tegner activity scores (7 vs 6, respectively; P = .010). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding the Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the patient-reported outcome measures, nor for any of the other outcome measures evaluated, and no differences in the rate of non–graft rupture related reoperations or complications. The ACLR + LET group exceeded the minimal clinically important difference with respect to the Tegner activity scale. Conclusion: In a retrospective comparative cohort study of adolescents, combined ACLR and LET was associated with a significantly lower graft rupture rate and no difference in non–graft rupture related reoperations or complications compared with isolated ACLR.

Background: Lateral extra-articular procedures have been effective in reducing graft rupture rates after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR), but the evidence supporting their role in ACL repair is sparse. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes of ACLR and lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) (ACLR+LET) against combined repair of the ACL and anterolateral (AL) structures (ACL+AL Repair). It was hypothesized that patients undergoing ACL+AL Repair would have noninferior clinical and radiological outcomes with respect to International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, knee laxity parameters, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that patients undergoing repair would have significantly better Forgotten Joint Score–12 (FJS-12) values and shorter times to return to the preinjury level of sport, without any increase in the rate of ipsilateral second ACL injury. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Consecutive patients evaluated with an acute ACL tear were considered for study eligibility. ACLR+LET was only performed when intraoperative tear characteristics contraindicated ACL repair. Patient-reported outcome measures such as the IKDC score, Lysholm score, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS); reinjury rates; anteroposterior side-to-side laxity difference; and MRI characteristics were reported at a minimum follow-up of 2 years. The noninferiority study was based on the IKDC subjective score; side-to-side anteroposterior laxity difference; and signal-to-noise quotient (SNQ). The noninferiority margins were defined using the existing literature. An a priori sample size calculation was performed using the IKDC subjective score as the primary outcome measure. Results: A total of 100 patients (47 ACLR+LET, 53 ACL+AL Repair) with a mean follow-up of 25.2 months (range, 24-31 months) were enrolled and underwent surgery within 15 days of injury. At the final follow-up, the differences between groups with respect to the IKDC score, anteroposterior side-to-side laxity difference, and SNQ did not exceed noninferiority thresholds. ACL+AL Repair was associated with a shorter time to return to the preinjury level of sport (ACL+AL Repair: mean, 6.4 months; ACLR+LET: mean, 9.5 months; P < .01), better FJS-12 values (ACL+AL Repair: mean, 91.4; ACLR+LET: mean, 97.4; P = .04), and a higher proportion of patients achieving the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the KOOS subdomains studied (Symptoms: 90.2% vs 67.4%, P = .005; Sport and Recreation: 94.1% vs 67.4%, P < .001; Quality of Life: 92.2% vs 73.9%, P = .01). There were no significant differences between groups with respect to ipsilateral second ACL injury rates (ACL+AL Repair group, 3.8% and ACLR+LET group, 2.1% [n = 1]; P = .63). Conclusion: ACL+AL Repair yielded clinical outcomes that were noninferior to (or not significantly different from) ACLR+LET with respect to IKDC subjective, Tegner activity level, and Lysholm scores; knee laxity parameters; graft maturity; and rates of failure and reoperation. However, there were significant advantages of ACL+AL Repair, including a shorter duration of time to return to the preinjury level of sport, better FJS-12 values, and a higher proportion of patients achieving PASS for KOOS subdomains studied (Symptoms, Sport and Recreation, Quality of Life).

The COVID-19 outbreak strongly affected Italy, putting a strain on the National healthcare system. Hospitals quickly reorganized the activity to cope with the emergency. This retrospective comparative study aimed to analyze the impact of the lockdown imposed in Italy during the COVID-19 outbreak on acute orthopedic trauma, in order to identify critical issues for improvement and future planning. We collected data on all the trauma admissions to a single University hospital DEA (Department of Emergency and Acceptance) in Rome during the COVID- 19 pandemic lockdown in Italy, comparing them with the corresponding period in 2019. We reported demographic data; the characteristics of the injury, including the anatomical location, fracture, sprain, dislocation, contusion, laceration, whether the injury site was exposed or closed, where the injury occurred, and polytrauma. We also recorded the waiting time in the emergency room and mode of transportation. The study sample was composed of 1199 patients, 636 (53.04%) males and 563 (46.96%) females. The overall number of admissions in 2019 (pre-COVID-19 period) was 995; then it was 204 during COVID-19 outbreak in 2020. The average age of the 2020 group was 51.9 ± 24.8 years, significantly higher than that of the 2019 group (41.4 ± 25.7) (p<0.0001). In particular, elderly patients (≥65 years) were the most commonly involved in the COVID-19 group, while in the pre- COVID-19 period they were middle-aged adults (15-44 years) (p<0.0001). The injury occurred at home in 65.7% of cases in the 2020 group, and in 32.3% of patients in the 2019 group. Concerning the injury type, in both groups, the most common injury was a fracture (45.1% in 2019; 62.7% in 2020) (p<0.0001). The most injured anatomical location during COVID-19 lockdown was the hand (14.2%), while in the pre-COVID- 19 group the most frequent injury type was polytrauma (22.8%). Despite the decrease of overall acute trauma referral rates during the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy, the incidence of fractures in elderly individuals remained stable, indicating that not all trauma presentations would necessarily decrease during such times.

The COVID-19 outbreak heavily attacked Italy, putting a strain for an extended time on the National healthcare system. Hospitals fastly rearranged the activity to cope with the crisis. This retrospective comparative study intended to investigate the impact of the lockdown imposed in Italy, in two different periods, during the COVID-19 outbreak on acute orthopedic trauma, in order to identify significant issues for improvement and future preparation. We obtained data on total trauma access to a single University hospital DEA (Department of Emergency and Acceptance) in Rome during two periods of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in Italy: from March 9th, 2020 to May 4th, 2020(Phase 1), from May 10th, 2020 to June 30th, 2020(Phase 2) and then comparing them with the analogous period in 2019. We recorded demographic data; the characteristics of the lesion, including the anatomical area, fracture, sprain, dislocation, contusion, laceration, whether the lesion site was exposed or closed, where the trauma occurred and polytrauma. We also reported the waiting time in the emergency room and the mode of transport. The study sample was composed of 1655 patients, 894 (54%) males and 761 (46%) females. The overall number of admissions in 2019 (pre-COVID-19 period) was 995; then it was 204 during Phase 1 and increased again to 456 during Phase 2. The average age of the Phase 1 group was 51.9 ± 24.8 years, significantly higher than that of the 2019 group (41.4 ± 25.7) and Phase 2 group (42.2 ± 22.5 years) (p=65 years) were the most commonly involved in the Phase 1 group, while in the pre-COVID-19 period and in Phase 2 they were middle-aged adults (15-44 years) (p<0.0001). The injury occurred at home in 66.2% of cases in the Phase 1 group, in 32.3% of cases in the Phase 2 group and in 32.3% of patients in the 2019 group. Concerning the injury type, in all groups, the most frequent injury was a fracture (45.1% in 2019; 62.7% in Phase 1; 50% Phase2) (p<0.0001). The most injured anatomical section during Phase 1 was the upper limb (43.1%), while in the pre-COVID-19 group and in Phase 2 group the most frequent injury location was the lower limb (48.3% and 40.8% respectively). Despite the decrease of overall acute trauma referral rates during the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy, the incidence of fractures in elderly people remained constant, indicating that not all trauma presentations would inevitably decrease during such circumstances.