Comparison of Subsequent Surgery After Repair in Bucket-Handle Meniscal Tears and Meniscectomy Analysis of a Large, Contained Cohort Study.

Background: Bucket-handle meniscal tears are large longitudinal vertical meniscal tears that have an attached fragment flipped into the intercondylar notch. Meniscal repair attempts to restore the function of the meniscus and aims to preserve joint mechanics. Alternatively, meniscectomy results in quicker recovery but may lead to future degeneration. Purposes: To evaluate the long-term risk of subsequent ipsilateral knee surgery in patients who underwent a bucket-handle meniscal repair (BHMR) versus meniscectomy/bucket-handle meniscal debridement (BHMD) and assess risk factors associated with subsequent knee surgical intervention. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: An electronic health records search for all patients who underwent arthroscopic knee meniscal surgery (repair and meniscectomy) between 2011 and 2018 was performed. Natural language processing was used to search for terms of interest in the long operative notes to determine whether these surgeries were performed for bucket-handle meniscal tears. These patients comprised our initial cohort. Study patients were followed for at least 1 year and for up to 5 years (until December 31, 2019), with censoring at death or membership disenrollment. Baseline patient characteristics and outcomes were evaluated via a database review. The primary outcome was subsequent ipsilateral knee surgeries and secondary outcomes included contralateral knee surgeries, deep surgical site infections, and venous thrombotic events. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to model for subsequent surgical treatment of the ipsilateral knee. A subset analysis for patients aged 30 to 50 years was then performed. Results: The median follow-up time was 52.4 months (interquartile range [IQR], 33.5-60 months). A total of 1359 patients underwent BHMR and 1537 patients underwent BHMD. The median age was 24 years (IQR, 17-34 years) for the BHMR versus 38 years (IQR, 27-47 years) for the BHMD group (P < .001). Body mass index (BMI) was significantly lower in the BHMR group compared with the BHMD group (P < .001). BHMR was significantly more likely to be performed during a concomitant ipsilateral anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) than a BHMD (44.2% vs 30.1%, P < .001). During the follow-up period, a total of 656 subsequent ipsilateral procedures were performed in 393 (13.6%) patients. Patients who underwent initial BHMR were at a significantly higher risk of undergoing subsequent meniscal repair (4.3% vs 1%, P < .001), meniscectomy (12.1% vs 3.3%, P < .001), and ACLR (7.4% vs 2.9%, P < .001) compared with those who underwent BHMD. Multivariable analysis showed that BHMR, younger age, and lower BMI were risk factors for subsequent ipsilateral surgery. After adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics, subset analysis showed that for patients aged 30 to 50 years, undergoing a BHMR versus a BHMD led to a 2.3-fold higher risk of subsequent surgery, a 5.3-fold higher risk of subsequent meniscal repair and a 3.2-fold higher risk of subsequent meniscectomy. Conclusion: BHMR was more often performed in younger patients with a lower BMI, especially during a concomitant ACLR. Patients treated with BHMR were more likely to undergo subsequent surgeries, with the likelihood decreasing with increasing age. Subset analyses showed increasing risk for subsequent surgeries with BHMR versus BHMD in the cohort consisting of patients aged 30 to 50 years.

Association Between Graft Type and Risk of Repeat Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Cohort Study of 1747 Patients.

BACKGROUND: With an increasing number of primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions (ACLRs), the burden of revision ACLR (rACLR) has also increased. Graft choice for rACLR is complicated by patient factors and the remaining available graft options. PURPOSE: To examine the association between graft type at the time of rACLR and the risk of repeat rACLR (rrACLR) in a large US integrated health care system registry while accounting for patient and surgical factors at the time of revision surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Data from the Kaiser Permanente ACLR registry were used to identify patients who underwent a primary isolated ACLR between 2005 and 2020 and then went on to have rACLR. Graft type used at rACLR, classified as autograft versus allograft, was the exposure of interest. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate the risk of rrACLR, with ipsilateral and contralateral reoperation as secondary outcomes. Models included factors at the time of the rACLR (age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, staged revision, femoral fixation, tibial fixation, femoral tunnel method, lateral meniscal injury, medial meniscal injury, and cartilage injury) and a factor from the primary ACLR (activity at injury) as covariates. RESULTS: A total of 1747 rACLR procedures were included. The crude cumulative rrACLR incidence at 8-year follow-up was 13.9% for allograft and 6.0% for autograft. Cumulative ipsilateral reoperation incidence at 8-year follow-up was 18.3% for allograft and 18.9% for autograft; contralateral reoperation cumulative incidence was 4.3% for allograft and 6.8% for autograft. With adjustment for covariates, a 70% lower risk for rrACLR was observed for autograft compared with allograft (hazard ratio [HR], 0.30; 95% CI, 0.18-0.50; P < .0001). No differences were observed for ipsilateral reoperation (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.73-1.51; P = .78) or contralateral reoperation (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.60-2.97; P = .48). CONCLUSION: The use of autograft at rACLR was associated with a 70% lower risk of rrACLR compared with allograft in this cohort from the Kaiser Permanente ACLR registry. When accounting for all reoperations outside of rrACLR after rACLR, the authors found no significant difference in risk between autograft and allograft. To minimize the risk of rrACLR, surgeons should consider using autograft for rACLR when possible.

Countersinking the Lag Screw or Blade During Cephalomedullary Nailing of Geriatric Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures: Less Collapse and Implant Prominence Without Increased Cutout Rates.

INTRODUCTION: The lag screw or helical blade of a cephalomedullary nail facilitates controlled collapse of intertrochanteric proximal femur fractures. However, excessive collapse results in decreased hip offset and symptomatic lateral implants. Countersinking the screw or helical blade past the lateral cortex may minimize subsequent prominence, but some surgeons are concerned that this will prevent collapse and result in failure through cutout. We hypothesized that patients with countersunk lag screws or helical blades do not experience higher rates of screw or blade cutout and have less implant prominence after fracture healing. METHODS: A retrospective review of 175 consecutive patients treated with cephalomedullary nails for AO/OTA 31A1-3 proximal femur fractures and a minimum 3-month follow-up and 254 patients with a 6-week follow-up at a single US level I trauma center. Patients were stratified based on countersunk versus noncountersunk lag screw or helical blade in a cephalomedullary nail. The primary outcome was the cutout rate at minimum 3 months, and the secondary outcome was radiographic collapse at minimum 6 weeks. RESULTS: Cutout rates were no different in patients with countersunk and noncountersunk screws and blades, and countersinking was associated with less collapse and less implant prominence at 6 weeks. DISCUSSION: Surgeons can countersink the lag screw or blade when treating intertrochanteric proximal femur fractures with a cephalomedullary nail without increasing failure rates and with the potential benefits of less prominent lateral implants and decreased collapse.

Supplemental medial small fragment fixation adds stability to distal femur fixation: A biomechanical study.

INTRODUCTION: Bridge plating of distal femur fractures with lateral locking plates is susceptible to varus collapse, fixation failure, and nonunion. While medial and lateral dual plating has been described in clinical series, the biomechanical effects of dual plating of distal femur fractures have yet to be clearly defined. The purpose of this study was to compare dual plating to lateral locked bridge plating alone in a cadaveric distal femur gap osteotomy model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Gap osteotomies were created in eight matched pairs of cadaveric female distal femurs (average age: 64 yrs (standard deviation ± 4.4 yrs); age range: 57-68 yrs;) to simulate comminuted extraarticular distal femur fractures (AO/OTA 33A). Eight femurs underwent fixation with lateral locked plates alone and were matched with eight femurs treated with dual plating: lateral locked plates with supplemental medial small fragment non-locking fixation. Mechanical testing was performed on an ElectroPuls E10000 materials testing system using a 10 kN/100 Nm biaxial load cell. Specimens were subject to 25,000 cycles of cyclic loading from 100-1000 N at 2 Hz. RESULTS: Two (2/8) specimens in the lateral only group failed catastrophically prior to completion of testing. All dual plated specimens survived the testing regimen. Dual plated specimens demonstrated significantly less coronal plane displacement (median 0.2 degrees, interquartile range [IQR], 0.0-0.5 degrees) compared to 2.0 degrees (IQR 1.9-3.3, p = 0.02) in the lateral plate only group. Dual plated specimens demonstrated greater bending stiffness compared to the lateral plated group (median 29.0 kN/degree, IQR 1.5-68.2 kN/degree vs median 0.50 kN/degree, IQR 0.23-2.28 kN/degree, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Contemporary fixation methods with a distal femur fractures are susceptible to mechanical failure and nonunion with lateral plates alone. Dual plate fixation in a cadaveric model of distal femur fractures underwent significantly less displacement under simulated weight bearing conditions and demonstrated greater stiffness than lateral plating alone. Given the significant clinical failure rates of lateral bridge plating in distal femur fractures, supplemental fixation should be considered, and dual plating of distal femurs augments mechanical stability in a clinically relevant magnitude.

Cephalomedullary helical blade is independently associated with less collapse in intertrochanteric femur fractures than lag screws.

OBJECTIVES: Excessive fracture site collapse and shortening in intertrochanteric femur fractures alter hip biomechanics and patient outcomes. The purpose of the study was to compare extent of collapse in cephalomedullary nails with blades or lag screws. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in collapse between helical blades and lag screws. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Single U.S. Level I Trauma Center. PATIENTS: 171 consecutive patients treated with cephalomedullary nails with either lag screw or blade for AO/OTA 31A1-3 proximal femur fractures and minimum 3-month follow-up. INTERVENTION: Lag screw or helical blade in a cephalomedullary nail. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was fracture site collapse at 3 months. RESULTS: There was a significantly higher proportion of reverse-oblique and transverse intertrochanteric femur fractures (31-A3) in the lag screw group (15/42 vs 25/129). A3 patterns were associated with more collapse. There was significantly less collapse in the blade group (median 4.7 mm, inter-quartile range 2.5-7.8 mm) than the screw group (median 8.4 mmm, inter-quartile range 3.7-11.2 mm, p 0.006). Median collapse was no different between blades and screws when comparing stable and unstable patterns. However, blades were independently associated with 2.5 mm less collapse (95%CI - 4.2, - 0.72 mm, p 0.006) and lower likelihood of excessive collapse (> 10 mm at 3 months, OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.13-0.74, p 0.007), regardless of fracture pattern. CONCLUSIONS: Helical blades are independently associated with significantly less collapse than lag screws in intertrochanteric proximal femur fractures, after adjusting for unstable fracture patterns. In fracture patterns at risk for collapse, surgeons can consider use of a helical blade due to its favorable sliding properties compared to screws.

Impact of neurosurgeon specialization on patient outcomes for intracranial and spinal surgery: a retrospective analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample 1998-2009.

OBJECTIVE The subspecialization of neurosurgical practice is an ongoing trend in modern neurosurgery. However, it remains unclear whether the degree of surgeon specialization is associated with improved patient outcomes. The authors hypothesized that a trend toward increased neurosurgeon specialization was associated with improved patient morbidity and mortality rates. METHODS The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) was used (1998-2009). Patients were included in a spinal analysis cohort for instrumented spine surgery involving the cervical spine ( International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes 81.31-81.33, 81.01-81.03, 84.61-84.62, and 84.66) or lumbar spine (codes 81.04-81.08, 81.34-81.38, 84.64-84.65, and 84.68). A cranial analysis cohort consisted of patients receiving a parenchymal excision or lobectomy operation (codes 01.53 and 01.59). Surgeon specialization was measured using unique surgeon identifiers in the NIS and defined as the proportion of a surgeon's total practice dedicated to cranial or spinal cases. RESULTS A total of 46,029 and 231,875 patients were identified in the cranial and spinal analysis cohorts, respectively. On multivariate analysis in the cranial analysis cohort (after controlling for overall surgeon volume, patient demographic data/comorbidities, hospital characteristics, and admitting source), each percentage-point increase in a surgeon's cranial specialization (that is, the proportion of cranial cases) was associated with a 0.0060 reduction in the log odds of patient mortality (95% CI 0.0034-0.0086) and a 0.0042 reduction in the log odds of morbidity (95% CI 0.0032-0.0052). This resulted in a 15% difference in the predicted probability of mortality for neurosurgeons at the 75th versus the 25th percentile of cranial specialization. In the spinal analysis cohort, each percentage-point increase in a surgeon's spinal specialization was associated with a 0.0122 reduction in the log odds of mortality (95% CI 0.0074-0.0170) and a 0.0058 reduction in the log odds of morbidity (95% CI 0.0049-0.0067). This resulted in a 26.8% difference in the predicted probability of mortality for neurosurgeons at the 75th versus the 25th percentile of spinal specialization. CONCLUSIONS For both spinal and cranial surgery patient cohorts derived from the NIS database, increased surgeon specialization was significantly and independently associated with improved mortality and morbidity rates, even after controlling for overall case volume.