Can even experienced orthopaedic surgeons predict who will benefit from surgery when patients present with degenerative meniscal tears? A survey of 194 orthopaedic surgeons who made 3880 predictions.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the ability of surgeons to predict the outcome of treatment for meniscal tears by arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) and exercise therapy in middle-aged patients. DESIGN AND SETTING: Electronic survey. Orthopaedic surgeon survey participants were presented 20 patient profiles. These profiles were derived from a randomised clinical trial comparing APM with exercise therapy in middle-aged patients with symptomatic non-obstructive meniscal tears. From each treatment group (APM and exercise therapy), we selected five patients with the best (responders) and five patients with the worst (non-responders) knee function after treatment. 1111 orthopaedic surgeons and residents in the Netherlands and Australia were invited to participate in the survey. INTERVENTIONS: For each of the 20 patient profiles, surgeons (unaware of treatment allocation) had to choose between APM and exercise therapy as preferred treatment and subsequently had to estimate the expected change in knee function for both treatments on a 5-point Likert Scale. Finally, surgeons were asked which patient characteristics affected their treatment choice. MAIN OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was the surgeons' percentage correct predictions. We also compared this percentage between experienced knee surgeons and other orthopaedic surgeons, and between treatment responders and non-responders. RESULTS: We received 194 (17%) complete responses for all 20 patient profiles, resulting in 3880 predictions. Overall, 50.0% (95% CI 39.6% to 60.4%) of the predictions were correct, which equals the proportion expected by chance. Experienced knee surgeons were not better in predicting outcome than other orthopaedic surgeons (50.4% vs 49.5%, respectively; p=0.29). The percentage correct predictions was lower for patient profiles of non-responders (34%; 95% CI 21.3% to 46.6%) compared with responders (66.0%; 95% CI 57.0% to 75.0%; p=0.01).In general, bucket handle tears, knee locking and failed non-operative treatment directed the surgeons' choice towards APM, while higher level of osteoarthritis, degenerative aetiology and the absence of locking complaints directed the surgeons' choice towards exercise therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons' criteria for deciding that surgery was indicated did not pass statistical examination. This was true regardless of a surgeon's experience. These results suggest that non-surgical management is appropriate as first-line therapy in middle-aged patients with symptomatic non-obstructive meniscal tears. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03462134.

Direct and indirect costs associated with nonoperative treatment for shoulder instability: an observational study in 132 patients.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder instability is associated with decreased functioning. The associated costs could be substantial and interesting to clinicians, researchers, and policy makers. This prospective observational study aims to (1) estimate productivity losses and healthcare expenses following the nonoperative treatment of shoulder instability and (2) identify patient characteristics that influence societal costs. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-two patients completed a questionnaire regarding production losses and healthcare utilization following consecutive episodes of shoulder instability. Productivity losses were calculated using the friction cost approach. Healthcare utilization was evaluated using standard costs. analysis of variance test was used to assess which patient characteristics are related to productivity losses and healthcare expenses. Societal costs were assessed using multilevel analyses. Bootstrapping was used to estimate statistical uncertainty. RESULTS: Mean productivity losses are €1469, €881, and €728 and mean healthcare expenses are €3759, €3267, and €2424 per patient per dislocation for the first, second, and third dislocation. Productivity losses decrease significantly after the second (mean difference €-1969, 95%CI= -3680 to -939) and third (mean difference €-2298, 95%CI= -4092 to -1288) compared to the first dislocation. CONCLUSIONS: Nonoperative treatment of shoulder instability has substantial societal costs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, economic analysis.

Pronounced biomaterial dependency in cartilage regeneration using nonexpanded compared with expanded chondrocytes.

AIM: We aimed to investigate freshly isolated compared with culture-expanded chondrocytes with respect to early regenerative response, cytokine production and cartilage formation in response to four commonly used biomaterials. MATERIALS & METHODS: Chondrocytes were both directly and after expansion to passage 2, incorporated into four biomaterials: Polyactive™, Beriplast®, HyStem® and a type II collagen gel. Early cartilage matrix gene expression, cytokine production and glycosaminoglycan (GAG) and DNA content in response to these biomaterials were evaluated. RESULTS: HyStem induced more GAG production, compared with all other biomaterials (p ≤ 0.001). Nonexpanded cells did not always produce more GAGs than expanded chondrocytes, as this was biomaterial-dependent. Cytokine production and early gene expression were not predictive for final regeneration. CONCLUSION: For chondrocyte-based cartilage treatments, the biomaterial best supporting cartilage matrix production will depend on the chondrocyte differentiation state and cannot be predicted from early gene expression or cytokine profile.