High Variability in Standardized Outcome Thresholds of Clinically Important Changes in Shoulder Instability Surgery: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine reported MCID and PASS values for PROMs following shoulder instability surgery and assess variability in published values depending on the surgery performed. Secondarily, our aims were to describe the methods used to derive MCID and PASS values in the published literature, including anchor-based, distribution-based, or other approaches, and to assess the frequency of MCID and PASS usage in studies on shoulder instability surgery. METHODS: A systematic review of MCID and PASS values following Bankart, Latarjet, and Remplissage procedures was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). The Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were queried from 1985 to 2023. Inclusion criteria included studies written in English, and studies reporting utilization MCID or PASS for patient reported outcome measures (PROMS) following Latarjet, Bankart, Remplissage approaches for shoulder instability surgery. Extracted data included study population characteristics, intervention characteristics, and outcomes of interest. Continuous data were described using median and range. Categorical variables, including PROMs reported and MCID/PASS methods, were described using percentages. As MCID is a patient-level metric and not a group-level metric, the authors validated that all included studies reported proportions (%) of subjects that met or exceeded the MCID. RESULTS: A total of 174 records were screened, and 8 studies were included in this review. MCID was the most widely utilized outcome threshold which was reported in all 8 studies, with only 2 studies reporting both the MCID and the PASS. The most widely studied PROMs were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) (range 5.65-9.6 for distribution MCID, 8.5 anchor MCID, 86 anchor PASS); Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) (range 11.4-12.4 distribution MCID, 82.5-87.5 anchor PASS); visual analog scale (VAS) (range 1.1-1.7 distribution MCID, 1.5-2.5 PASS); Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) (range 60.7-254.9 distribution MCID, 126.43 anchor MCID, 571-619.5 anchor PASS); and Rowe scores (range 5.6-8.4 distribution MCID, 9.7 anchor MCID). Notably, no studies reported on substantial clinical benefit (SCB) or maximal outcome improvement (MOI). CONCLUSION: Despite the wide array of available PROMs for assessing shoulder instability surgery outcomes, the availability of clinically significant outcome thresholds such as MCID and PASS remains relatively limited. While MCID has been the most frequently reported metric, there is considerable inter-study variability observed in their values. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Knowing the outcome thresholds such as MCID and PASS of the PROMs frequently used to evaluate the results of glenohumeral stabilization surgery is fundamental, since they allow us to know what is a clinically significant improvement for the patient.

Video Analysis of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries in National Basketball Association Athletes.

PURPOSE: Research surrounding the biomechanics and video analysis of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries at the professional level has emerged in recent years as a tool to screen athletes for potential biomechanical deficits. The purpose of this study was to analyze and discuss the most common mechanism, body position, and activity at the time of ACL injury among NBA players. METHODS: Anterior cruciate ligament injuries over 10 consecutive NBA seasons (2009-2010 to 2019-2020) were reviewed from publicly available sources. A 10-question survey was developed and utilized to analyze each video clip. These questions were divided into three categories: 1. contact mechanism, 2. activity at the time of injury, and 3. position of the involved lower extremity at the time of injury. Two reviewers analyzed the videos individually, and differing answers were resolved via consensus review, with a senior author arbitrating in the case of any discrepancies. RESULTS: Overall, 23 ACL ruptures were included. The most common injury mechanism was indirect contact with another player without knee contact (56.5%), and no patients had an ACL rupture as a result of direct knee contact with another player. The most common action at the time of injury was pivoting (47%), and the most common basketball action was dribbling (43.5%). Additionally, the vast majority of patients were injured while on offense (91.3%). The most common knee positions were early flexion (73.9%) and abduction (95.7%). The most common foot positions were abduction relative to the knee (82.6%), in eversion (73.9%), and dorsiflexion (56.5%). The most common hip position was early flexion (87%), and all hips were abducted (100%). CONCLUSION: Our study found that the majority of ACL ruptures occurred during offensive play and over half were secondary to contact with an opposing player (but without a direct blow to the injured knee), indicating that such perturbations may alter the kinematics of the players' movement. Additionally, a large majority of ACL injuries occurred while the hip was abducted with the knee in abduction relative to the hip and while the knee was in early flexion from 0° to 45°.

The impact of glenohumeral bone loss on range of motion in patients with anterior shoulder instability.

BACKGROUND: Loss of shoulder range of motion (ROM) is common after surgical management of anterior shoulder instability; however, it remains unclear to what degree this is related to their injury. AIM: The purpose of this study was to compare passive shoulder ROM in patients with ASI to a normal contralateral shoulder. METHODS: A total of 121 patients undergoing stabilization surgery were prospectively enrolled. Preoperative advanced imaging was used to assess for glenoid bone loss and the presence of off-track Hill-Sachs lesions. Passive ROM was measured in both shoulders while under anaesthesia prior to surgery. RESULTS: In all directions, there was a significant loss of ROM in shoulders with instability. Regression analysis showed that neither a glenoid bone defect nor greater glenoid bone loss were associated with a loss of ROM in any plane. The presence of a Hill-Sachs lesion was significantly associated with a loss of external rotation, while off-track lesions were associated with a loss of ROM in all planes (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients with anterior shoulder instability lost motion in all directions, with a profound loss of external rotation. The presence of a glenoid bone defect nor greater bone loss did not reliably predict a loss of range of motion. A Hill-Sachs lesion was predictive of a loss of external rotation, while an off-track lesion was predictive of a loss of range in all directions.

Tendon Transfers in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes after tendon transfers in the setting of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to find primary clinical studies of any type of tendon transfer in the setting of RTSA. RESULTS: Overall, 17 studies (level of evidence [LOE] I: 1, LOE II: 0, LOE III: 3, LOE IV: 13) met inclusion criteria, with 300 shoulders. Most patients were female (56.7%), with an average age of 68.7 years (range 19 to 89) and a mean follow-up of 46.2 months (range 6 to 174). 11 studies reported outcomes after combined latissimus dorsi and teres major transfer (LDTM) while eight studies reported on latissimus dorsi transfer only (LD). Improvements in commonly reported subjective and functional outcome measures were as follows: external rotation +32° (LDTM) and +30° (LD), flexion +65° (LDTM) and +59° (LD), Visual Analog Score -5.4 (LDTM) and -4.5 (LD), subjective shoulder value +43.8% (LDTM) and +46.3% (LD), and overall Constant score +33.8 (LDTM) and +38.7 (LD). The overall complication rate was 11.3%, including tendon transfer ruptures (0.7%), instability (3.0%), infection (2.0%), and nerve injury (0.3%). The all-cause repeat operation rate was 7.3%, most commonly for arthroplasty revision (5.3%). Subgroup analysis revealed that lateralized implants with tendon transfer resulted in markedly greater improvements in Constant score, flexion, ER1, and ER2 while medialized implants with tendon transfer had markedly greater improvements in Visual Analog Score, subjective shoulder value, and abduction. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing tendon transfer of either combined LDTM or latissimus dorsi alone in the setting of RTSA have markedly improved subjective and functional outcomes. A moderate incidence of complications (11.3%) was noted in this patient population.

Single Shot Interscalene Block with Liposomal Bupivacaine versus Non-Liposomal Bupivacaine in Shoulder Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Regional anesthesia is a valuable component of multimodal pain control in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), and multiple interscalene block anesthetic options exist, including non-liposomal interscalene bupivacaine (NLIB) and liposomal interscalene bupivacaine (LIB). The purpose of the current of study was to compare pain control and opioid consumption within 48 hours postoperative in those undergoing TSA with either LIB or NLIB. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study at a single academic medical center including consecutive patients undergoing inpatient (>23-hour hospitalization) primary anatomic or reverse TSA from 2016 to 2020 who received either LIB or a NLIB for perioperative pain control. Perioperative patient outcomes were collected including pain levels and opioid usage, as well as 30- and 90-day ED visits or readmissions. The primary outcome was postoperative pain and opioid use. RESULTS: Overall, 489 patients were included in this study (316 LIB and 173 NLIB). Pain scores at 3, 6, 12, and 48 hours postoperatively were not statistically significantly different (p>0.05 for all). However, the LIB group had improved pain scores at 24- and 36-hours postoperative (p<0.05 all). There was no difference in the incidence of severe postoperative pain, defined as a 9 or 10 NRS-11 score, between the two anesthesia groups after adjusting for preoperative pain and baseline opioid use (OR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.57-2.74; p=0.57). Overall, 99/316 (31.3%) of patients receiving LIB did not require any postoperative opioids compared with 38/173 (22.0%) receiving NLIB; however, this difference was not statistically significant after adjusting for prior opioid use and preoperative pain (p=0.33). No statistically significant differences in postoperative total morphine equivalents or mean daily morphine equivalents consumed between the groups were found during their hospital stays (p>0.05 for both). Finally, no significant differences in 30- and 90-day ED visits or readmission rates were found (all p>0.05). CONCLUSION: LIB and NLIB demonstrated differences in patient reported pain scores at 24- and 36-hours post operation, although these did not reach clinical significance. There were no statistically significant differences in opioid consumption during the hospital stay, including opioid use, total morphine equivalents and daily mean morphine equivalents consumed during the hospital stay. Additionally, no differences were observed in 30- and 90-day ED visits or readmission rates.

The Impact of Political Partisanship, Certificate of Need, Medicaid Expansion, and Area Deprivation Index on Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Prices in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Recent mandates from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) require United States hospitals to disclose healthcare service pricing. Yet, there's a gap in understanding how state-level factors affect hospital service pricing, like total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Comprehending these influences can help policymakers and healthcare providers manage costs and improve care access for vulnerable populations. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of state characteristics such as partisan lean, Certificate of Need (CON) status, and Medicaid expansion, on TSA price. METHODS: TSA price data was extracted from the Turquoise Health Database using CPT code 23472. State partisan lean was determined by evaluating each state during the 2020 election year for its legislature (both senate and house), governor, presidential vote, and Insurance Commissioner affiliation, categorizing states as either "Republican-leaning" or "Democratic-leaning." CON status, Medicaid expansion, area deprivation index (ADI), and population density information was obtained from publicly available sources. Multivariable regression models were used to assess the relationship between these factors and TSA price. RESULTS: The study included 2,068 hospitals nationwide. The median (IQR) price of TSA across these hospitals was $12,607 ($9,185). In the multivariable analysis, hospitals in Republican-leaning states were associated with a significantly greater price of +$210 (p = 0.0151), while Medicaid expansion was also associated with greater price +$1,878 (p < 0.0001). CON status was associated with a significant reduction in TSA prices of -$2,880 (p < 0.0001). In North Carolina an ADI >85 was associated with a reduction in price (p = 0.0045), while urbanization designation did not significantly impact TSA price (p = 0.8457). CONCLUSION: This cross-sectional observational study found that Republican-leaning states and Medicaid expansion were associated with increased TSA prices, while an ADI >85 and CON laws were associated with reduced TSA prices.

A bibliometric analysis of the top 50 cited studies related to acromioclavicular joint instability.

Background: Acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) injury is a common orthopaedic condition accounting for over 40 % of all shoulder injuries. The purpose of this study is to assess the research trends and characteristics of the top 50 cited articles on ACJ instability. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in Web of Science to identify articles primarily related to ACJ injury or instability. Characteristics including citation number, country of origin, journal and institution of publication, impact factor, authorship, level of evidence, patient demographics, and study type were analyzed and recorded. Results: Research output on ACJ instability has been steadily increasing, with the top 50 cited studies predominantly presenting Level IV evidence. These studies primarily focused on treatment outcomes which included predominantly male patients and exhibited a large variation in citation counts. The American Journal of Sports Medicine was the most productive journal, and the USA was the most productive nation. Conclusion: There is an increasing number of publications in the ACJ instability literature, primarily concentrated in a few institutions and journals, and focusing mainly on treatment outcomes. A significant portion of these publications are of low scientific quality, and there is a notable lack of research on outcomes for females.

Defining Pseudoparalysis & Pseudoparesis - A Consensus Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a modified Delphi process on the definition of shoulder pseudoparalysis and pseudoparesis. METHODS: A consensus process on the definition of a diagnosis of pseudoparalysis utilizing a modified Delphi technique was conducted, and 26 shoulder/sports surgeons from 11 countries, selected based on their level of expertise in the field, participated in these consensus statements. Consensus was defined as achieving 80-89% agreement, whereas strong consensus was defined as 90-99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was indicated by 100% agreement with a proposed statement. RESULTS: Three statements regarding the diagnosis of pseudoparalysis reached strong (>89%) consensus: passive range of motion (ROM) should be unaffected, the passive range of abduction should not be considered and diagnosis should be excluded if lidocaine injection produces a substantial improvement in range of motion. Additionally, consensus (>79%) was reached that the active range of external rotation should not be considered for diagnosis, pain as a cause of restricted motion must be excluded, and that distinctions between restricted active flexion and external rotation should be made by ROM rather than tear characteristics. No consensus could be reached on statements regarding the size, number of tendons or chronicity of cuff tears. Nor was there agreement on the active range of flexion permitted or on the difference between pseudoparalysis and pseudoparesis. CONCLUSION: A modified Delphi process was utilized to establish consensus on the definition of shoulder pseudoparalysis and pseudoparesis. Unfortunately, almost half of the statements did not reach consensus, and agreement could not be reached across all domains for a unifying definition for the diagnosis of pseudoparalysis in the setting of RCTs. Furthermore, it was not agreed how or whether pseudoparalysis should be differentiated from pseudoparesis. Based on the lack of a consensus for these terms, studies should report explicitly how these terms are defined when they are used.

Outcomes of Arthroscopic Stabilization for Posterior Shoulder Instability - A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Posterior shoulder instability makes up approximately 10% of all shoulder instability cases and its diagnosis and treatment is less well understood. Recently, however, there has been increased recognition of posterior instability and posterior stabilization. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature to ascertain the outcomes on arthroscopic stabilization of posterior shoulder instability. METHODS: Two independent reviewers conducted a systematic literature search based on PRISMA guidelines, utilizing the MEDLINE database. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported postoperative outcomes for posterior shoulder instability following arthroscopic stabilization. RESULTS: A total of 48 studies met inclusion criteria for review including 2307 shoulders. Majority of patients were male (83.3%), with an average age of 26.1 years and a mean follow-up of 46.8 months. The functional outcome score primarily utilized for postoperative assessment was ASES with an average of 84.77. Overall, 90.9% of patients reported being satisfied with their arthroscopic stabilization. Recurrent instability occurred in 7.4% of patients. The total revision rate was 5.2%. 16.6% of patients reported residual pain postoperatively. The rate of return to play was 86.4% with 68.0% of patients returning to play at the same or higher level of play. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic stabilization of posterior shoulder instability resulted in good outcomes with high patient satisfaction and low rates of recurrent instability, revisions, and residual pain.

Risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent instability remains a major source of morbidity following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Many risk factors and predictive tools have been described, but there remains a lack of consensus surrounding individual risk factors and their contribution to outcomes. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature to identify and quantify risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair. METHODS: A literature search was performed using the PubMed/MEDLINE databases based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were included if they evaluated risk factors for recurrent instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair. RESULTS: Overall, 111 studies were included in the analysis, including a total of 19,307 patients and 2750 episodes of recurrent instability with 45 risk factors described. Age at operation was reported by 60 studies, with 35 finding increased risk at younger ages. Meta-analysis showed a 2-fold recurrence rate of 27.0% (171 of 634) for patients <20 years old compared with 13.3% (197 of 1485) for older patients (P < .001). Seventeen studies completed multivariable analysis, 13 of which were significant (odds ratio 1.3-14.0). Glenoid bone loss was evaluated by 39 studies, with 20 finding an increased risk. Multivariable analysis in 9 studies found odds ratios ranging from 0.7 to 35.1; 6 were significant. Off-track Hill-Sachs lesions were evaluated in 21 studies (13 significant), with 3 of 4 studies that conducted multivariable analysis finding a significant association with odds ratio of 2.9-8.9 of recurrence. The number of anchors used in repair was reported by 25 studies, with 4 finding increased risk with fewer anchors. Pooled analysis demonstrated a 25.0% (29 of 156) risk of recurrence with 2 anchors, compared with 18.1% (89 of 491) with 3 or more anchors (P = .06). Other frequently described risk factors included glenohumeral joint hyperlaxity (46% of studies reporting a significant association), number of preoperative dislocations (31%), contact sport participation (20%), competitive sport participation (46%), patient sex (7%), and concomitant superior labral anterior-posterior tear (0%). CONCLUSION: Younger age, glenoid bone loss, and off-track Hill-Sachs lesions are established risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Other commonly reported risk factors included contact and competitive sports participation, number of fixation devices, and patient sex.

European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow (SECEC) rotator cuff tear registry Delphi consensus.

Background: The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a Delphi process on the factors that should be included in a registry for those patients undergoing rotator cuff tear treatment. Methods: A consensus process on the treatment of rotator cuff utilizing a modified Delphi technique was conducted. Fifty-seven surgeons completed these consensus statements and 9 surgeons declined. The participants were members of the European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow committees representing 23 European countries. Thirteen questions were generated regarding the diagnosis and follow-up of rotator cuff tears were distributed, with 3 rounds of questionnaires and final voting occurring. Consensus was defined as achieving 80%-89% agreement, whereas strong consensus was defined as 90%-99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was defined by 100% agreement with a proposed statement. Results: Of the 13 total questions and consensus statements on rotator cuff tears, 1 achieved unanimous consensus, 6 achieved strong consensus, 5 achieved consensus, and 1 did not achieve consensus. The statement that reached unanimous consensus was that the factors in the patient history that should be evaluated and recorded in the setting of suspected/known rotator cuff tear are age, gender, comorbidities, smoking, traumatic etiology, prior treatment including physical therapy/injections, pain, sleep disturbance, sports, occupation, workmen's compensation, hand dominance, and functional limitations. The statement that did not achieve consensus was related to the role of ultrasound in the initial diagnosis of patients with rotator cuff tears. Conclusion: Nearly all questions reached consensus among 57 European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow members representing 23 different European countries. We encourage surgeons to use this minimum set of variables to establish rotator cuff registries and multicenter studies. By adapting and using compatible variables, data can more easily be compared and eventually merged across countries.

Superior Pain Reduction with Anteromedialization Tibial Tubercle Osteotomy Versus Non-Operative Management for Patellofemoral Osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients with patellofemoral osteoar-thritis (PFOA) treated non-operatively with those treated operatively with an unloading anteromedialization tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO). METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed to identify patients with isolated PFOA who were either managed non-operatively or surgically with a TTO and who had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients were surveyed with the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS-JR), Anterior Knee Pain scale (Kujala), and Tegner Activity scale. Statistical analysis included two-sample t-testing, one-way ANOVA, and bivariate analysis. RESULTS: The clinical outcomes of 49 non-operatively managed patients (mean age: 52.7 ± 11.3 years; mean follow-up: 1.7 ± 1.0 years) and 35 operatively managed patients (mean age: 31.8 ± 9.4 years; mean follow-up: 3.5 ± 1.7 years) were assessed. The mean VAS improved sig-nificantly in both groups [6.12 to 4.22 (non-operative), p < 0.0001; 6.94 to 2.45 (TTO); p < 0.0001], with operatively treated patients having significantly lower postoperative pain than non-operatively managed patients at the time of final follow-up [2.45 (TTO) vs. 4.22 (non-operative), p < 0.001]. The mean KOOS-JR score was significantly greater in the operative group at time of final follow-up [78.7 ± 11.6 (TTO) vs. 71.7 ± 17.8 (non-operative), p = 0.035]. There was no significant difference in Kujala or Tegner scores between the treatment groups. Additionally, there was no sig-nificant relationship between the number of intra-articular injections, duration of NSAID use, and number of physical therapy sessions on clinical outcomes in the non-operatively treated group (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: An unloading anteromedialization TTO provides significantly better pain relief and restoration of function compared to non-operative management in the treatment of symptomatic PFOA.

Matrix-Induced Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation Versus Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation of the Knee A Retrospective Comparison.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the short-term clinical outcomes of matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI) to those seen following traditional autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) in the management of symptomatic cartilage lesions of the knee. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent either ACI or MACI from January 2011 to March 2018. Patients with a minimum postoperative follow-up of 18 months were contacted. Demographic information, intraoperative findings, and patient-reported functional outcomes scores were collected. Comparisons were made between the two cell-based cartilage repair techniques. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were included in the study (39 ACI, 17 MACI). Visual analog scale (VAS) for pain scores improved significantly in both groups, with MACI patients demonstrating significantly lower postoperative pain scores compared to those treated with ACI. In the ACI group, there was a decrease in the Tegner Activity score compared to the preoperative baseline, while no significant difference was seen between pre- and postoperative activity levels in the MACI group. Patients were generally satisfied with the outcome of their procedures, and there was no significant difference in satisfaction between groups. No patients re-quired additional surgery during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Both ACI and MACI demonstrated good short-term postoperative clinical results with improved pain and activity levels compared to the preoperative baseline. Patients treated with the MACI technique demonstrated greater reductions in pain scores compared to ACI, and while ACI resulted in a decrease in levels of postoperative activity, activity levels for MACI remained stable.

Posterior Shoulder Instability, Part I-Diagnosis, Nonoperative Management, and Labral Repair for Posterior Shoulder Instability-An International Expert Delphi Consensus Statement.

PURPOSE: To establish consensus statements on the diagnosis, nonoperative management, and labral repair for posterior shoulder instability. METHODS: A consensus process on the treatment of posterior shoulder instability was conducted, with 71 shoulder/sports surgeons from 12 countries participating on the basis of their level of expertise in the field. Experts were assigned to 1 of 6 working groups defined by specific subtopics within posterior shoulder instability. Consensus was defined as achieving 80% to 89% agreement, whereas strong consensus was defined as 90% to 99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was indicated by 100% agreement with a proposed statement. RESULTS: Unanimous agreement was reached on the indications for nonoperative management and labral repair, which include whether patients had primary or recurrent instability, with symptoms/functional limitations, and whether there was other underlying pathology, or patient's preference to avoid or delay surgery. In addition, there was unanimous agreement that recurrence rates can be diminished by attention to detail, appropriate indication and assessment of risk factors, recognition of abnormalities in glenohumeral morphology, careful capsulolabral debridement and reattachment, small anchors with inferior placement and multiple fixation points that create a bumper with the labrum, treatment of concomitant pathologies, and a well-defined rehabilitation protocol with strict postoperative immobilization. CONCLUSIONS: The study group achieved strong or unanimous consensus on 63% of statements related to the diagnosis, nonoperative treatment, and labrum repair for posterior shoulder instability. The statements that achieved unanimous consensus were the relative indications for nonoperative management, and the relative indications for labral repair, as well as the steps to minimize complications for labral repair. There was no consensus on whether an arthrogram is needed when performing advanced imaging, the role of corticosteroids/orthobiologics in nonoperative management, whether a posteroinferior portal is required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.

Shoulder Instability-Return to Sports After Injury (SIRSI) Scale Shows That Lack of Psychological Readiness Predicts Outcomes and Recurrence Following Surgical Stabilization.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the predictive ability of psychological readiness to return to sports on clinical outcomes and recurrences in athletes who return to sports following shoulder instability surgery. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent shoulder instability surgery between September 2020 and October 2021 (arthroscopic Bankart repair or Latarjet procedure) with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients were grouped according to the achievement of psychological readiness to return to play using the SIRSI scale (≥ 55 points) measured at 6 months following surgery. Recurrences were measured and functional outcomes were evaluated by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Rowe, and Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the VAS and Rowe scores was calculated using the distribution-based method of ½ standard deviation of the delta (difference between postoperative and preoperative scores). The patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for the VAS scale was set at 2.5 based on previous literature. To evaluate the predictive ability of SIRSI a regression model analysis and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used. RESULTS: A total of 108 who achieved psychological readiness (PSR) and 41 who did not (NPSR) met the study criteria. PSR achieved significantly higher percentages of MCID and PASS thresholds for VAS than NPSR (MCID: 68.5% vs 48.7%, p=0.026; PASS: 92.5% vs 58.5%, p<0.001). However, there were no differences in the percentage of patients achieving MCID for the Rowe score between groups (98.1% vs 100%, p=0.999). The only strongest independent predictor of postoperative outcomes was being psychologically ready to return to sports. The SIRSI scale had an excellent predictive ability for recurrences (area under curve 0.745, 95% CI 0.5-0.8). Of those who sustained a recurrence, 20% were not psychologically ready compared to 4.3% who were (p= 0.002). A power analysis was not conducted for this study. CONCLUSION: The SIRSI scale is associated with postoperative clinical outcomes and recurrences in patients who returned to sports following shoulder instability surgery. Patients who were not psychologically ready following shoulder instability surgery had worse clinical outcomes with fewer patients achieving clinically significant outcomes (PASS and MCID) for pain, and a higher risk of recurrence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Retrospective cohort study.

Editorial Commentary: Latarjet for Anterior Shoulder Instability Literature Shows Limited Reporting of Outcomes in Female Patients: Female Patients Show Similar Outcomes but Greater Rate of Emergency Department Visits and Possible Greater of Complications.

It has been reported that use of the Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability increased 250% from 2008 to 2019. With this increase in use, it is imperative to minimize complications. At present, most literature focuses on male patients, with scant evidence regarding female patients. Outcomes are similar when female with male patients are compared, but female patients have greater postoperative visits to the emergency department than male patients, which requires specific attention during the postoperative period. In addition, the literature reporting complications in female versus male patients after Latarjet is conflicting; some studies show similar rates of complications, whereas other studies show greater rates of adverse events in female patients. Previous consensus statements recommended (1) careful dissection; (2) identification of the musculocutaneous and axillary nerves; (3) prevention of overlateralization of the graft; (4) the use of tranexamic acid to reduce blood loss; (5) accurate screw placement; and (6) careful preparation of the glenoid neck and coracoid to reduce rates of nonunion or delayed union.

Clinical outcomes in prospective versus retrospective studies on arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The majority of the current literature on arthroscopic Bankart repair is retrospective, and discrepancies exist regarding clinical outcomes including recurrent instability and return to play among studies of different levels of evidence. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to perform a systematic review of the literature to compare the outcomes of prospective and retrospective studies on arthroscopic Bankart repair. METHODS: A search was performed using the PubMed/Medline database for all studies that reported clinical outcomes on Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability. The search term "Bankart repair" was used, with all results being analyzed via strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Three independent investigators extracted data and scored each included study based on the 10 criteria of the Modified Coleman Methodology Score out of 100. A χ2 test was performed to assess if recurrent instability, revision, return to play, and complications are independent of prospective and retrospective studies. RESULTS: A total of 193 studies were included in the analysis, with 53 prospective studies and 140 retrospective in design. These studies encompassed a total of 13,979 patients and 14,019 surgical procedures for Bankart repair for shoulder instability. The rate of redislocation in the prospective studies was 8.0% vs. 5.9% in retrospective studies (P < .001). The rate of recurrent subluxation in the prospective studies was 3.4% vs. 2.4% in retrospective studies (P = .004). The rate of revision was higher in retrospective studies at 4.9% vs. 3.9% in prospective studies (P = .013). There was no significant difference in terms of overall rate to return to play between prospective and retrospective studies (90% and 91%, respectively; P = .548). The overall rate of non-instability complications in the prospective cohort was 0.27% vs. 0.78% in the retrospective studies (P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: The overall rates of recurrent dislocations-subluxations are higher in prospective studies than retrospective studies. However, rates of revision were reportedly higher in retrospective studies. Complications after arthroscopic Bankart repair are rare in both prospective and retrospective studies, and there was no difference in rates of return to play.

Outcomes and complications of revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty after failed primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty or hemiarthroplasty: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to systematically review the evidence in the literature to ascertain the functional outcomes, range of motion (ROM), and complication and reoperation rates after revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for a failed primary total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or hemiarthroplasty (HA). METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library databases. Studies were included if they reported clinical outcomes for revision RSA for a failed primary TSA or HA. RESULTS: Our review found 23 studies including 1041 shoulders (627 TSA and 414 HA) meeting our inclusion criteria. The majority of patients were female (66.1%), with an average age of 69.0 years (range: 39-93 years) and a mean follow-up of 46.3 months. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and visual analog scale pain scores improved from 32.6 to 61.9 and 6.7 to 2.7, respectively. ROM results include forward flexion, abduction, and external rotation, which improved from 59.4° to 107.7°, 50.7° to 104.4°, and 19.8° to 26.3°, respectively. Only 1 of the 10 studies reporting internal rotation found a statistically significant difference, with the mean internal rotation improving from S1-S3 preoperatively to L4-L5 postoperatively for patients undergoing HA. The overall complication rate and reoperation rate were 23.4% and 12.5%, respectively. The most common complications were glenoid component loosening (6.0%), fracture (periprosthetic, intraoperative, or other scapula fractures) (n = 4.7%), and infection (n = 3.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Revision RSA for a failed primary TSA and HA has been shown to result in excellent functional outcomes and improved ROM, suggesting that patients who have failed TSA or HA may benefit from a revision RSA.