Arthroscopic Single and Double Row Repair of Isolated and Combined Subscapularis Tears Result in Similar Improvements in Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature to (1) describe arthroscopic subscapularis repair constructs and outcomes in patients with isolated and combined subscapularis tears and (2) compare outcomes after single- and double-row subscapularis repair in both of these settings. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for Level I-IV evidence studies that investigated outcomes after arthroscopic subscapularis repair for the treatment of isolated subscapularis tears or subscapularis tears combined with posterosuperior rotator cuff tears in adult human patients. Data recorded included study demographics, repair construct, shoulder-specific outcome measures, and subscapularis retears. Study methodological quality was analyzed using the MINORS score. Heterogeneity and low levels of evidence precluded meta-analysis. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 811 articles (318 duplicates, 493 screened, 67 full-text review). Forty-three articles (2406 shoulders, 57% males, mean age range 42 to 67.5 years, mean MINORS score 13.4 ± 4.1) were included and analyzed. Articles reported on patients with isolated subscapularis tears (n = 15), combined tears (n = 17), or both (n = 11). The majority of subscapularis repairs used single-row constructs (89.4% of isolated tears, 88.9% of combined tears). All except for one study reporting on outcome measures found clinically significant improvements after subscapularis repair, and no clinically significant differences were detected in 5 studies comparing isolated to combined tears. Subscapularis retear rates ranged from 0% to 17% for isolated tears and 0% to 32% for combined subscapularis and posterosuperior rotator cuff tears. Outcomes and retear rates were similar in studies comparing single-row to double-row repair for isolated and combined subscapularis tears (P > .05 for all). CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic subscapularis repair resulted in significant improvements across all outcome measures, regardless of whether tears were isolated or combined or if repairs were single or double row. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

Superior Capsular Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Surgical Techniques and Clinical Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To evaluate surgical techniques and clinical outcomes of arthroscopic superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) for the treatment of massive irreparable rotator cuff tears. METHODS: A systematic review was registered with PROSPERO and performed using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. The PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched. Studies investigating SCR with reported surgical techniques were included. Animal studies, cadaveric studies, review studies, and letters to the editor were excluded. The technical aspects of the surgical techniques for SCR were analyzed in each article, which included graft type, glenoid fixation method, greater tuberosity fixation method, graft passage technique, suture management, margin convergence, concomitant procedures, and postoperative rehabilitation protocol. Clinical outcomes, when available, were also analyzed. RESULTS: We screened 365 articles, of which 29 described surgical techniques for SCR. According to the Modified Coleman Methodology Score, 24 articles were rated as poor (score < 55), 4 were rated as fair (score between 55 and 69), and 1 was rated as good (score between 70 and 84), with an average score of 25.8 ± 20.9. The most commonly performed technique for SCR used the following: an acellular dermal allograft, 2 biocomposite suture anchors for glenoid fixation, transosseous-equivalent double-row suture anchor fixation for greater tuberosity fixation with 2 biocomposite medial-row anchors and 2 biocomposite lateral-row anchors, the double-pulley technique combined with an arthroscopic grasper and/or pull suture to pass the graft into the shoulder, the performance of both anterior and posterior margin convergence, and a native rotator cuff repair when possible. Only 8 studies reported clinical outcomes, and they showed that SCR provides significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes, significant improvement in shoulder range of motion, variable graft failure rates, low complication rates, and variable reoperation rates. There were no studies comparing outcomes among the various surgical techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Many surgical techniques exist for arthroscopic SCR. However, no superior technique was shown because there were no studies comparing clinical outcomes among these various techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, systematic review of Level III, IV, and V studies.

Quality Measures in Orthopaedic Sports Medicine: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To report the current quality measures that are applicable to orthopaedic sports medicine physicians. METHODS: Six databases were searched with a customized search term to identify quality measures relevant to orthopaedic sports medicine surgeons: MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, the National Quality Forum (NQF) Quality Positioning System (QPS), the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) National Quality Measures Clearinghouse (NQMC), the Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) database, and the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) website. Results were screened by 2 Board-certified orthopaedic surgeons with fellowship training in sports medicine and dichotomized based on sports medicine-specific or general orthopaedic (nonarthroplasty) categories. Hip and knee arthroplasty measures were excluded. Included quality measures were further categorized based on Donabedian's domains and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) National Quality Strategy priorities. RESULTS: A total of 1,292 quality measures were screened and 66 unique quality measures were included. A total of 47 were sports medicine-specific and 19 related to the general practice of orthopaedics for a fellowship-trained sports medicine specialist. Nineteen (29%) quality measures were collected within PQRS, with 5 of them relating to sports medicine and 14 relating to general orthopaedics. AAOS Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) comprised 40 (60%) of the included measures and were all within sports medicine. Five (8%) additional measures were collected within AHRQ and 2 (3%) within NQF. Most quality measures consist of process rather than outcome or structural measures. No measures addressing concussions were identified. CONCLUSIONS: There are many existing quality measures relating to the practice of orthopaedic sports medicine. Most quality measures are process measures described within PQRS or AAOS CPGs. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Knowledge of quality measures are important as they may be used to improve care, are increasingly being used to determine physician reimbursement, and can inform future quality measure development efforts.

Long-term outcomes after Bankart shoulder stabilization.

PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were (1) to analyze long-term outcomes in patients who have undergone open or arthroscopic Bankart repair and (2) to evaluate study methodologic quality through validated tools. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of Level I to IV Evidence using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Clinical outcome studies after open or arthroscopic Bankart repair with a minimum of 5 years' follow-up were analyzed. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were extracted and reported. Study methodologic quality was evaluated with Modified Coleman Methodology Scores and Quality Appraisal Tool scores. RESULTS: We analyzed 26 studies (1,781 patients). All but 2 studies were Level III or IV Evidence with low Modified Coleman Methodology Scores and Quality Appraisal Tool scores. Patients analyzed were young (mean age, 28 years) male patients (81%) with unilateral dominant shoulder (61%), post-traumatic recurrent (mean of 11 dislocations before surgery) anterior shoulder instability without significant glenoid bone loss. The mean length of clinical follow-up was 11 years. There was no significant difference in recurrence of instability with arthroscopic (11%) versus open (8%) techniques (P = .06). There was no significant difference in instability recurrence with arthroscopic suture anchor versus open Bankart repair (8.5% v 8%, P = .82). There was a significant difference in rate of return to sport between open (89%) and arthroscopic (74%) techniques (P < .01), whereas no significant difference was observed between arthroscopic suture anchor (87%) and open repair (89%) (P = .43). There was no significant difference in the rate of postoperative osteoarthritis between arthroscopic suture anchor and open Bankart repair (26% and 33%, respectively; P = .059). There was no significant difference in Rowe or Constant scores between groups (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability using arthroscopic suture anchor and open Bankart techniques yields similar long-term clinical outcomes, with no significant difference in the rate of recurrent instability, clinical outcome scores, or rate of return to sport. No significant difference was shown in the incidence of postoperative osteoarthritis with open versus arthroscopic suture anchor repair. Study methodologic quality was poor, with most studies having Level III or IV Evidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of studies with Level I through IV Evidence.

Tendency of Driving to the Basket Is Associated With Increased Risk of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Tears in National Basketball Association Players: A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Driving to the basket in basketball involves acceleration, deceleration, and lateral movements, which may expose players to increased anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury risk. It is unknown whether players who heavily rely on driving have decreased performance on returning to play after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). HYPOTHESIS: Players with a greater tendency to drive to the basket would be more likely to tear their ACL versus noninjured controls and would experience decreased performance when returning to play after ACLR. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Season-level performance statistics and ACL injuries were aggregated for National Basketball Association (NBA) seasons between 1980 and 2017 from publicly available sources. Players' tendency to drive was calculated using 49 common season-level performance metrics. Each ACL-injured player was matched with 2 noninjured control players by age, league experience, and style of play metrics. Points, playing minutes, driving, and 3-point shooting tendencies were compared between players with ACL injuries and matched controls. Independent-samples t test was utilized for comparisons. RESULTS: Of 86 players with a total of 96 ACL tears identified in the NBA, 50 players were included in the final analysis. Players who experienced an ACL tear had a higher career-average drive tendency than controls (P = .047). Players with career-average drive tendency ≥1 standard deviation above the mean were more likely to tear their ACL than players with drive tendency <1 standard deviation (5.2% vs 2.7%; P = .026). There was no significant difference in total postinjury career points (P = .164) or career minutes (P = .237) between cases and controls. There was also no significant change in drive tendency (P = .152) or 3-point shooting tendency (P = .508) after return to sport compared with controls. CONCLUSION: NBA players with increased drive tendency were more likely to tear their ACL. However, players who were able to return after ACLR did not underperform compared with controls and did not alter their style of play compared with the normal changes seen with age. This information can be used to target players with certain playing styles for ACL injury prevention programs.

Comparison of Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation and Osteochondral Allograft Transplantation of the Knee in a Large Insurance Database: Reoperation Rate, Complications, and Cost Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare (1) the reoperation rates, (2) risk factors for reoperation, (3) 30-day complication rates, and (4) cost differences between autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) and osteochondral allograft transplantation (OCA) of the knee in a large insurance database. DESIGN: Subjects who underwent knee ACI (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] code 27412) or OCA (CPT code 27415) with minimum 2-year follow-up were queried from a national insurance database. Reoperation was defined by ipsilateral knee procedure after index surgery. Multivariate logistic regression models were built to determine the effect of independent variables (age, sex, tobacco use, obesity, diabetes, and concomitant osteotomy) on reoperation rates. The 30-day complication rates were assessed using ICD-9-CM codes. The cost of the procedures per patient was calculated. Statistical comparisons were made. All P values were reported with significance set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 909 subjects (315 ACI and 594 OCA) were included (mean follow-up 39.2 months). There was a significantly higher reoperation rate after index ACI compared with OCA (67.6% vs. 40.4%, P < 0.0001). Concomitant osteotomy at the time of index procedure significantly reduced the risk for reoperation in both groups (odds ratio [OR] 0.2, P < 0.0001 and OR 0.2, P = 0.009). The complication rates were similar between ACI (1.6%) and OCA (1.2%) groups (P = 0.24). Day of surgery payments were significantly higher after ACI compared with OCA (P = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: Autologous chondrocyte implantation had significantly higher reoperation rates and cost with similar complication rates compared with OCA. Concomitant osteotomy significantly reduced the risk for reoperation in both groups.

Diagnosis and management of superior labrum anterior posterior lesions in overhead athletes.

Shoulder pain is a common complaint in overhead athletes, and superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) lesions are a common cause of this pain. The pathological cascade which results in the SLAP lesion consists of a combination of posterior inferior capsular tightness and scapular dyskinesis, resulting in a 'peel back' phenomenon at the biceps anchor and leading to the SLAP tear. Physical exam tests vary in their sensitivity and specificity in detecting SLAP lesions, so MRI is helpful in demonstrating the anatomical alteration. Treatment can be conservative, with posterior inferior capsular stretching and scapular open and closed chain exercises. Many SLAP lesions in overhead athletes require surgical treatment that involves repair of the labrum back to the glenoid. Treatment of concomitant injuries such as rotator cuff tears and Bankart lesions in conjunction with the SLAP repair may be necessary.