Injuries to the quadriceps muscle group are common in athletes performing high-speed running and kicking sports. The complex anatomy of the rectus femoris puts it at greatest risk of injury. There is variability in prognosis in the literature, with reinjury rates as high as 67% in the severe graded proximal tear. Studies have highlighted that athletes can reinjure after nonoperative management, and some benefit may be derived from surgical repair to restore function and return to sport (RTS). This injury is potentially career-threatening in the elite-level athlete, and we aim to highlight the key recent literature on interventions to restore strength and function to allow early RTS while reducing the risk of injury recurrence. This article reviews the optimal diagnostic strategies and classification of quadriceps injuries. We highlight the unique anatomy of each injury on MRI and the outcomes of both nonoperative and operative treatment, providing an evidence-based management framework for athletes. Cite this article:
Over the past 30 years there have been many improvements
in implant fixation, correction of deformity, improved polyethylene
wear, and survival after knee replacement. The work over the last
decade has focused on less invasive surgical techniques, multimodal
pain management protocols, more rapid functional recovery and reduced
length of stay, aiming to minimise the side effects of treatment
while maintaining function and implant durability. When combined
and standardised these pre-, intra- and post-operative factors have
now facilitated outpatient knee replacement procedures for unicompartmental
replacement, patella femoral arthroplasty and total knee replacement
(TKR). We have found liposomal bupivacaine, with potential for longer
therapeutic action, to be a helpful adjunct and describe our current
pain management program. The next step in our multimodal program
is to improve the duration of patient satisfaction and reduce cost
and length of stay after TKR. Cite this article:
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains an immediate
threat to patients following total hip and knee replacement. While
there is a strong consensus that steps should be taken to minimise
the risk to patients by utilising some forms of prophylaxis for
the vast majority of patients, the methods utilised have been extremely
variable. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been published
by various professional organisations for over 25 years to provide recommendations
to standardise VTE prophylaxis. Historically, these recommendations
have varied widely depending in underlying assumptions, goals, and
methodology of the various groups. This effort has previously been
exemplified by the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and
the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). The former
group of medical specialists targeted minimising venographically
proven deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (the vast majority of which are
asymptomatic) as their primary goal prior to 2012. The latter group of
surgeons targeted minimising symptomatic VTE. As a result prior
to 2012, the recommendations of the two groups were widely divergent.
In the past year, both groups have reassessed the current literature
with the principal goals of minimising symptomatic VTE events and
bleeding complications. As a result, for the first time the CPGs
of these two major subspecialty organisations are in close agreement.
Thromboprophylaxis remains a controversial subject. A vast amount of epidemiological and trial data about venous thromboembolism has been published over the past 40 years. These data have been distilled and synthesised into guidelines designed to help the practitioner translate this extensive research into ‘evidence-based’ advice. Guidelines should, in theory, benefit patient care by ensuring that every patient routinely receives the best prophylaxis; without guidelines, it is argued, patients may fail to receive treatment or be exposed to protocols which are ineffective, dangerous or expensive. Guidelines, however, have not been welcomed or applied universally. In the United States, orthopaedic surgeons have published their concerns about the thromboprophylaxis guidelines prepared by the American College of Chest Physicians. In Britain, controversy persists with many surgeons unconvinced of the risk/benefit, cost/benefit or practicality of thromboprophylaxis. The extended remit of the recent National Institute of Clinical Excellence thromboprophylaxis guidelines has been challenged. The reasons for this disquiet are addressed in this paper and particular emphasis is placed on how clinically-acceptable guidelines could be developed and applied.
