A comprehensive scoping review of tibial cysts after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Purpose The purpose of this study was to perform a scoping review of published literature reporting on surgical management of tibial cysts which developed after ACLR. Methods A scoping review was conducted following the Arksey and O’Malley framework for scoping studies and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. A search strategy using the terms [“Tibial Cyst” AND “ACL”], [“Pretibial Cyst” AND “ACL”] was applied to the PUBMED database. Results Thirty-seven studies published between 1990 and 2019 were a part of this scoping review. Non-absorbable implants for tibial graft fixation were used in 10 studies (comprising a total 21 patients), while bio-absorbable implants were used in 27 studies (comprising a total 115 patients). Incidence of tibial cyst was reported in 3 studies (434 primary ACLRs) from whom 3.9% (n = 17) developed tibial cyst. Tibial cyst development in relation to use of bio-absorbable screws for tibial ACL graft fixation was reported in 16 studies (42.1%). Use of bio-absorbable screws with another factor was found to be related to tibial cyst development in another 1 study (2.6%). Most common symptoms were presence of mass or swelling, pain, tenderness, drainage, instability and effusion. Conclusion This scoping review demonstrated that tibial cysts is more frequently related to bioabsorbable screws, however it can also occur due to other causes. Current literature on tibial cyst after ACLR is of low-quality evidence. Future research is required to better understand aetiology, risk factors for cyst formation and the best possible mode of management. Level of evidence IV

Functional Reconstruction of Forehead and Midface Deficits Using the Endoscopic Technique and Bio-Absorbable Implants

Objectives: Functional deficits of the forehead and midface can pose significant problems for patients varying from mild asymmetry to various degrees of functional impairment including total paralysis. Our objectives were to analyse the use of bio-absorbable implants to reconstruct forehead and midface deficits, all of which were for functional (noncosmetic) reasons. Methods: This study was a retrospective case series between 2008 and 2018. Institutional review board approval was obtained from the Beaumont Health Human Investigation Committee. Surgeries were performed at a tertiary care centre. We evaluated 50 patients who underwent correction of functional deficits of forehead, eyebrow, and midface using the endoscopic technique and bio-absorbable implants. Patient demographics and indicated etiologies and characterization of minor and major complications and their occurrence rates were characterized. Results: Fifty patients were included in the study from 2008 to 2018, with 68% female and 32% male. Combined blepharoplasty and brow lift was the most commonly performed procedure, followed by midface lift and browplasty. The mean follow-up time was 372 days. No major operative complications including stroke, permanent nerve paralysis, or mortality occurred. There was a 4% rate of temporary nerve paresthesia that resolved, 2% rate of infection, and 6% rate of implant migration requiring revision surgery. Conclusion: The endoscopic approach and use of bio-absorbable implants to reconstruct functional deficits of the forehead and midface are safe and effective. There were zero major complications and most of the minor complications were temporary. There was a significant association between non-age-related functional impairment and risk of complication.

Orbital Floor Reconstruction: A Comparison of Outcomes between Absorbable and Permanent Implant Systems

There are distinct advantages and disadvantages between bioresorbable and permanent implants in orbital floor reconstruction. Our aim was to compare the outcomes and complications of resorbable implants and permanent implants in orbital floor fracture repair. A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients who underwent orbital floor fracture repair at a rural, tertiary care center from 2011 through 2016. Main outcome measures included improvement in diplopia, ocular motility, enophthalmos, hypoglobus, and infraorbital nerve sensation. A total of 87 patients underwent orbital floor reconstruction. After exclusion criteria were applied, 22 patients were included in the absorbable implant cohort, and 20 patients in the nonabsorbable implant cohort. All absorbable implants were composed of poly L-lactide/poly glycolide/poly D-lactide (PLL/PG/PDL), and nonabsorbable implants included both titanium/porous polyethylene (Ti/PPE) composite and titanium (Ti) mesh. Mean fracture surface area was 2.1 cm2 (standard deviation [SD]:± 0.9 cm2, range: 0.4–3.6 cm2) for the absorbable implant group and 2.3 cm2 (SD: ± 1.1 cm2, range: 0.6–4.4 cm2) for the nonabsorbable implant group ( p = 0.58). There were no significant differences in diplopia, ocular motility, enophthalmos, hypoglobus, and infraorbital nerve sensation between absorbable and nonabsorbable implant groups. The mean follow-up time for absorbable and nonabsorbable implant groups was 622 (SD ± 313) and 578 (SD ± 151) days respectively ( p = 0.57). For moderate-size orbital floor fracture repairs, there is no difference in outcomes between absorbable implants consisting of PLL/PG/PDL and nonabsorbable implants consisting of Ti mesh or Ti/PPE combination.