English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Category:   AnkleIntroduction/Purpose:   To compare clinical, sports, work, and radiological outcomes between primary and secondary OLTs (&lt;15mm) treated with arthroscopic BMS.Methods:   Ethical approval was obtained before the start of the study. A power analysis was performed for the primary outcome measure, the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) during activities. Secondary OLTs were matched to primary OLTs in a 1:2 ratio using lesion size, patient age, body mass index, and sex as prognostic covariates to control for confounding. Secondary outcomes included pre- and one-year postoperative clinical assessment of the NRS at rest, American Orthopaedic Foot &amp; Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) subscales, and the EQ-5D general health questionnaire. The rates and time to return to work and sports were collected. Radiological examinations were performed preoperatively and at final follow-up using computed tomography (CT). The postoperative outcomes were compared with a Wilcoxon rank-sum test; a univariate linear regression analysis was used to investigate the influence of covariates on clinical outcome scores.Results:   After matching, 22 and 12 patients with smaller (&lt;15 mm) OLTs were included in the primary and secondary group, respectively. The NRS during activities was not different between primary cases (median: 2, IQR: 1 - 4.5) and secondary cases (median: 3, IQR: 1 - 4), P= 0.5. Both groups showed a significant difference between all pre- and postoperative clinical outcome scores, except for the FAOS symptoms subscale in the primary group and NRS at rest in the secondary group. No significant differences in any clinical outcome scores were found between both groups at one-year follow-up, nor did any covariate significantly influence the clinical outcome scores. The return to sport rate was 90% for primary cases and 83% for secondary cases (P= 0.6). All patients returned to work. Lesion filling on CT was complete (67% - 100%) in 59% of primary cases and 67% of secondary cases (P= 0.6).Conclusion:   No differences in outcomes were observed between arthroscopic bone marrow stimulation in primary and secondary OLT at one-year follow-up. Repeat BMS may therefore be a viable treatment option for failed OLTs in the short term.

Outcomes of Bone Marrow Stimulation for Secondary Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus Equal Outcomes for Primary Lesions