Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 7 of 7 items for :
- Author: João Espregueira-Mendes x
- Sports & Arthroscopy x
Search for other papers by Francisco Figueroa in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by David Figueroa in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by João Espregueira-Mendes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Graft size in hamstring autograft anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) surgery is an important factor directly related to failure. Most of the evidence in the field suggests that the size of the graft in hamstring autograft ACL reconstruction matters when the surgeon is trying to avoid failures.
-
The exact graft diameter needed to avoid failures is not absolutely clear and could depend on other factors, but newer studies suggest than even increases of 0.5 mm up to a graft size of 10 mm are beneficial for the patient. There is still no evidence to recommend the use of grafts > 10 mm.
-
Several methods – e.g. folding the graft in more strands – that are simple and reproducible have been published lately to address the problem of having an insufficient graft size when performing an ACL reconstruction. Due to the evidence presented, we think it is necessary for the surgeon to have them in his or her arsenal before performing an ACL reconstruction.
-
There are obviously other factors that should be considered, especially age. Therefore, a larger graft size should not be taken as the only goal in ACL reconstruction.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3:93-97. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170038
Clínica Alemana-Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile
Search for other papers by Francisco Figueroa in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by David Figueroa in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Rafael Calvo in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Hospital Padre Hurtado, Santiago, Chile
Search for other papers by Alex Vaisman in
Google Scholar
PubMed
3Bs Research Group – Biomaterials, Biodegradables and Biomimetics, University of Minho, Portugal; ICVS/3Bs–PT Government Associate Laboratory, Portugal
Orthopaedics Department of Minho University, Portugal
Search for other papers by João Espregueira-Mendes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
New indications for meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) are being added, but the general expert opinion is that it is still a procedure reserved for symptomatic meniscal loss.
-
Lateral MAT has better clinical outcomes and less failure risk compared to medial MAT.
-
Ideal conditions (low-grade chondral lesions) make MAT a more survivable and successful procedure.
-
Meniscal extrusion after MAT is common and does not seem to alter results.
-
Midterm survivorship of a MAT is reported to be 85–90%, while long-term survivorship decreases to 50–70% depending on chondral status and concomitant procedures.
-
Even if the procedure is a success, there are high possibilities of not being able to resume sports activities.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:115-120. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180052
Clínica Alemana-Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile
Search for other papers by Francisco Figueroa in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by David Figueroa in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Rafael Calvo in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Hospital Padre Hurtado, Santiago, Chile
Search for other papers by Alex Vaisman in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Dom Henrique Research Centre, Portugal
3Bs Research Group – Biomaterials, Biodegradables and Biomimetics, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal
ICVS/3Bs–PT Government Associate Laboratory, Braga, Portugal
Orthopaedics Department of Minho University, Braga, Portugal
Search for other papers by João Espregueira-Mendes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
There is a concern regarding which grafts should be used in combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and medial collateral ligament (MCL) reconstructions, with a paucity of recommendations focused on this specific topic.
-
Expert opinions suggest the use of allograft-only reconstructions to limit donor-site morbidity or using at least one allograft and one autograft.
-
When a hamstring tendon autograft is harvested, techniques that maintain both the integrity of the sartorius fascia and the gracilis are recommended because of the role that the ST-G-S (semitendinosus-gracilis-sartorius) complex plays in valgus stability in the setting of an MCL-deficient knee.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:221-225. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190049
Hospital Sotero del Rio, Santiago, Chile
Search for other papers by Francisco Figueroa in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by David Figueroa in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Rafael Calvo in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Hospital Padre Hurtado, Santiago, Chile
Search for other papers by Alex Vaisman in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by João Espregueira-Mendes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Hamstring autograft use has been linked to an increased risk of infection after anterior cruciate (ACL) reconstruction compared to other grafts. The absolute reason for this remains unclear, with contamination after harvesting and preparation of the graft being the most accepted hypothesis.
-
Using the rationale that a contaminated graft could be the main factor in postoperative septic arthritis and in an effort to maximize the antibiotic efficacy of the graft, the Vancomycin presoaking technique was developed. It has shown success in decreasing the infection rate in ACL reconstruction. In recent years, an important number of research articles using this protocol have appeared, but the technique is still not widely implemented.
-
Recent literature shows that Vancomycin presoaking of the graft has shown a successful decrease in the infection rate after hamstring autograft ACL reconstruction. It has also shown efficacy decreasing the infection rate in other types of grafts (patellar tendon, quadriceps tendon, allograft) and also in patients with concomitant ligament procedures or open surgeries.
-
Despite the positive effects of Vancomycin presoaking reducing the infection rate after ACL reconstruction, the lack of prospective randomized control trials and the heterogeneity of the different studies mean it is not feasible to recommend Vancomycin presoaking of the graft universally for every ACL reconstruction patient.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:211-216. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200059
Search for other papers by Vicente Carlos da Silva Campos in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Francisco Guerra Pinto in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Diogo Constantino in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Porto Biomechanics Laboratory (LABIOMEP), Faculty of Sports, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
Search for other papers by Renato Andrade in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Dom Henrique Research Centre, Porto, Portugal
ICVS/3Bs, PT Government Associate Laboratory, Braga/Guimarães, Portugal
School of Medicine, Minho University, Braga, Portugal
Search for other papers by João Espregueira-Mendes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Complete access to the posterior medial compartment of the knee may represent a technical challenge during arthroscopy in patients with a tight tibiofemoral joint space.
-
Medial collateral release reduces direct iatrogenic cartilage damage in the medial compartment of the knee through manipulation with instruments.
-
We recommend performing medial collateral release in surgeries that access the posteromedial compartment (e.g. partial meniscectomy for ruptures of the posterior horn of medial meniscus or posterior root repairs) when the patient has a tight tibiofemoral joint space.
-
There are two main techniques to perform medial collateral release: inside-out and outside-in. Regardless of the technique used, releasing medial ligament structures is a safe and effective method to be used in the diagnosis and treatment of injuries to the medial compartment.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:669-675. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200128
Hospital Sotero del Rio, Santiago, Chile
Search for other papers by Francisco Figueroa in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by David Figueroa in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sven Putnis in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Hospital Sotero del Rio, Santiago, Chile
Search for other papers by Rodrigo Guiloff in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Patricio Caro in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Orthopaedics Department of Minho University, Portugal
Search for other papers by João Espregueira-Mendes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Limited knowledge of the anatomy and biomechanics of the posterolateral corner (PLC) of the knee, coupled with poor patient outcomes with non-operative management, resulted in the PLC often being labelled as the ‘dark side’ of the knee. In the last two decades, extensive research has resulted in a better understanding of the anatomy and function of the PLC, and has led to the development of anatomic reconstructions that have resulted in improved patient outcomes.
-
Despite considerable attention in the clinical orthopaedic literature (nearly 400 articles published in the last decade), a standardized algorithm for the diagnosis and treatment of the PLC is still lacking, and much controversy remains.
-
Considering the literature review, there is not a reconstruction technique that clearly prevails over the others. As anatomic, biomechanical, and clinical knowledge of PLC injuries continues to progress, finding the balance between re-creating native anatomy and safely performing PLC reconstruction provides a big challenge. Treatment decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:676-685. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200096
Ripoll y De Prado Sports Clinic, Murcia-Madrid, FIFA Medical Centre of Excellence, Madrid, Spain
International Centre of Sports Traumatology of the Ave, Vila do Conde, Portugal
3Bs Research Group, I3Bs, Research Institute on Biomaterials, Biodegradables and Biomimetics, University of Minho, Headquarters of the European Institute of Excellence on Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, AvePark, Parque de Ciência e Tecnologia, Barco, Guimarães, Portugal
ICVS/3Bs, PT Government Associate Laboratory, Braga/Guimarães, Portugal
Search for other papers by Hélder Pereira in
Google Scholar
PubMed
ICVS/3Bs, PT Government Associate Laboratory, Braga/Guimarães, Portugal
Search for other papers by Ibrahim Fatih Cengiz in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sérgio Gomes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
ICVS/3Bs, PT Government Associate Laboratory, Braga/Guimarães, Portugal
Clínica do Dragão, Espregueira-Mendes Sports Centre, FIFA Medical Centre of Excellence, Porto, Portugal
Orthopedic Department, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal
Search for other papers by João Espregueira-Mendes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Pedro L. Ripoll in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Joan C. Monllau in
Google Scholar
PubMed
ICVS/3Bs, PT Government Associate Laboratory, Braga/Guimarães, Portugal
The Discoveries Centre for Regenerative and Precision Medicine, Headquarters at University of Minho, Avepark, Barco, Guimarães, Portugal
Search for other papers by Rui L. Reis in
Google Scholar
PubMed
ICVS/3Bs, PT Government Associate Laboratory, Braga/Guimarães, Portugal
Orthopaedic Department, Hospital del Mar, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
The Discoveries Centre for Regenerative and Precision Medicine, Headquarters at University of Minho, Avepark, Barco, Guimarães, Portugal
Search for other papers by J. Miguel Oliveira in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Clinical management of meniscal injuries has changed radically in recent years. We have moved from the model of systematic tissue removal (meniscectomy) to understanding the need to preserve the tissue.
-
Based on the increased knowledge of the basic science of meniscal functions and their role in joint homeostasis, meniscus preservation and/or repair, whenever indicated and possible, are currently the guidelines for management.
-
However, when repair is no longer possible or when facing the fact of the previous partial, subtotal or total loss of the meniscus, meniscus replacement has proved its clinical value. Nevertheless, meniscectomy remains amongst the most frequent orthopaedic procedures.
-
Meniscus replacement is currently possible by means of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) which provides replacement of the whole meniscus with or without bone plugs/slots. Partial replacement has been achieved by means of meniscal scaffolds (mainly collagen or polyurethane-based). Despite the favourable clinical outcomes, it is still debatable whether MAT is capable of preventing progression to osteoarthritis. Moreover, current scaffolds have shown some fundamental limitations, such as the fact that the newly formed tissue may be different from the native fibrocartilage of the meniscus.
-
Regenerative tissue engineering strategies have been used in an attempt to provide a new generation of meniscal implants, either for partial or total replacement. The goal is to provide biomaterials (acellular or cell-seeded constructs) which provide the biomechanical properties but also the biological features to replace the loss of native tissue. Moreover, these approaches include possibilities for patient-specific implants of correct size and shape, as well as advanced strategies combining cells, bioactive agents, hydrogels or gene therapy.
-
Herein, the clinical evidence and tips concerning MAT, currently available meniscus scaffolds and future perspectives are discussed.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180103
