OBJECTIVES This systematic review aims to summarize the body of available literature on pediatric extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation in order to delineate current utilization, practices, and outcomes, while highlighting gaps in current knowledge. DATA SOURCES PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. STUDY SELECTION We searched for peer-reviewed original research publications on pediatric extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (patients less then 18 yr old) and were inclusive of all publication years. DATA EXTRACTION Our systematic review used the structured Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses methodology. Our initial literature search was performed on February 11, 2019, with an updated search performed on August 28, 2019. Three physician reviewers independently assessed the retrieved studies to determine inclusion in the systematic review synthesis. Using selected search terms, a total of 4,095 publications were retrieved, of mination of candidacy, timing of activation of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, staffing/logistics, cannulation strategies, outcomes, and the use of simulation for training. CONCLUSIONS This review highlights gaps in our understanding of best practices for pediatric extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation. We summarize current studies available and provide a framework for the development of future studies.OBJECTIVES Pediatric protocols to guide allocation of limited resources during a disaster lack data to validate their use. The 2011 Pediatric Emergency Mass Critical Care Task Force recommended that expected duration of critical care be incorporated into resource allocation algorithms. We aimed to determine whether currently available pediatric illness severity scores can predict duration of critical care resource use. DESIGN Retrospective cohort study.  https://www.selleckchem.com/products/otx015.html  SETTING Seattle Children's Hospital. PATIENTS PICU patients admitted 2016-2018 for greater than or equal to 12 hours (n = 3,206). INTERVENTIONS None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS We developed logistic and linear regression models in two-thirds of the cohort to predict need for and duration of PICU resources based on Pediatric Risk of Mortality-III, Pediatric Index of Mortality-3, and serial Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction-2 scores. We tested the predictive accuracy of the models with the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (neeted greater than or equal to 24 hours of any resource use for 78.9% of patients and greater than or equal to 24 hours of ventilation for 83.1%. Model fit and accuracy improved for prediction of resource use within 3 days of admission, and was lower for noninvasive positive pressure ventilation, vasoactive infusions, continuous renal replacement therapy, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and length of stay. CONCLUSIONS A model incorporating 12-hour Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction score performed well in estimating how long patients may require PICU resources, especially mechanical ventilation. A pediatric disaster triage algorithm that includes both likelihood for survival and for requiring critical care resources could minimize subjectivity in resource allocation decision-making.Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is a commonly performed procedure, with an increasing frequency leading to an increased number of revision procedures. Etiologies for graft rupture are varied and can include technical issues, repeat trauma, and graft choice. The preoperative evaluation before a revision ACL reconstruction should include a detailed history and physical exam, as well as radiographs, magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate graft integrity and for concomitant injuries, as well as computed tomography to measure for bone tunnel osteolysis. Surgical techniques for revision ACL reconstruction include a 1-stage or 2-stage procedure with possible bone grafting and repair of associated injuries. Recent studies show worse clinical outcomes after a revision procedure; however, research continues to emerge with novel techniques and rehabilitation protocols to improve patient outcomes after revision ACL reconstruction.A subset of patients have residual rotational laxity following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) despite the evolution of ACLR techniques. In recent years, there has been increased interest in addressing residual laxity because it is associated with poor outcomes after ACLR. There is an expanding body of knowledge on the anatomy and biomechanics of the anterolateral soft tissue restraints in regard to their rotational control of the knee and this has reignited an interest in extra-articular reconstruction techniques for augmenting ACLR. Reconstruction techniques currently used can be broadly categorized as either lateral extra-articular tenodesis or anterolateral ligament reconstruction. In this review, we discuss the relevant anatomy, biomechanics, and rationale behind the indications and technique of our current extra-articular augmentation procedure.Although the incidence of anterior cruciate ligament injuries continues to rise, return to sport (RTS) rates remain low and risk of the second injury remains high. No gold-standard criteria exist for medical clearance to RTS after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. The lack of consensus may be driven by the multifactorial nature of the clinical decision that includes a combination of physical and psychological factors. Tools such as the Quality of Movement Assessment, which identifies physical deficits and faulty movement patterns to provide targeted recommendations for safe RTS, and the Anterior Cruciate Ligament Return to Sport after Injury Scale, which determines psychological readiness by measuring an athlete's emotions, confidence, and risk appraisal, have been developed in recent years. This review summarizes the existing evidence regarding RTS and highlights the need for a comprehensive evaluation of an athlete's readiness to return.Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is common and affects a wide variety of individuals. An ACL reconstruction is the treatment of choice for patients with subjective and objective symptoms of instability and is of particular importance to cutting or pivoting athletes. With many variables involved in ACL reconstruction, femoral tunnel placement has been found to affect clinical outcomes with nonanatomic placement being identified as the most common technical error. Traditionally the femoral tunnel was created through the tibial tunnel or transtibial with the use of a guide and a rigid reaming system. Because of proximal, nonanatomic tunnel placement using the transtibial technique, the use of the anteromedial portal and outside-in drilling techniques has allowed placement of the tunnel over the femoral footprint. In this paper, we discuss the difference between the 3 techniques and the advantages and disadvantages of each. The authors then explore the clinical differences and outcomes in techniques by reviewing the relevant literature.