Optimizing Safe Opioid Prescribing: A Paradigm Shift in Buprenorphine Management for Orthopaedic Surgery.

The worsening opioid epidemic in the United States, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, necessitates innovative approaches to pain management. Buprenorphine, a long-acting opioid, has gained popularity due to its safety profile and accessibility. Orthopaedic surgeons, encountering an increasing number of patients on buprenorphine, face challenges in perioperative management. This article will update orthopaedic surgeons on new developments in the understanding of buprenorphine as a pain reliever and share evidence-based practice guidelines for buprenorphine management. For patients on buprenorphine for opioid use disorder or chronic pain, the updated recommendation is to continue their home dose of buprenorphine through the perioperative period. The patient's buprenorphine prescriber should be contacted and notified of any impending surgery. The continuation of buprenorphine should be accompanied by a multimodal approach to analgesia, including a preoperative discussion about expectations of pain and pain control, regional anesthesia, standing acetaminophen, Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs when possible, gabapentinoids at night for patients under 65 years, cryotherapy, elevation, and early mobilization. Patients can also be prescribed short-acting, immediate-release opioids for breakthrough pain. Transdermal buprenorphine is emerging as an excellent option for the management of acute perioperative pain in both elective and nonelective orthopaedic patients. A single patch can provide a steady dose of pain medication for up to 1 week during the postoperative period. A patch delivery method can help combat patient nonadherence and ultimately provide better overall pain control. In the future, transdermal buprenorphine patches could be applied in virtually all fracture surgery, spinal surgery, total joint arthroplasty, ligament reconstructions with bony drilling, etc. As the stigma surrounding buprenorphine decreases, further opportunities for perioperative use may develop.

High Case Volume Predicts Greater Odds of Autograft Use and Meniscal Repair for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

PURPOSE: To evaluate how both annual surgeon and facility volume affect the cost and outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery. We also aimed to identify trends in how surgeon caseload predicts graft selection. METHODS: The 2014 State Ambulatory and Surgical Database from Florida was used. Every case with Current Procedural Terminology code 29888 ("Arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction") was selected. Surgeon and facility identifiers were used to separate high- and low-volume groups, defined as >25 cases for surgeons and >125 cases for facilities. Univariate analysis was performed for patient demographics and surgical characteristics. Multivariate analysis was performed on significant factors to determine how these variables impact cost and odds of allograft usage, postoperative admission, and meniscal repair. RESULTS: There were 7905 cases performed between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2014 after excluding same-year revisions. High-volume surgeons had $6155 lower total charges, were 1.949 times more likely to use an autograft, and had 54.5% lower odds of postoperative admission (all P < .001). They were also 1.196 times more likely to perform a meniscal repair (P = .017). In patients younger than 18, low-volume surgeons were 3.7 times more likely to use an allograft (P < .001). Concomitant multiligamentous procedures were also performed at greater rates in the high-volume group. Postoperative admission added $18,698, and allografts added $9174 (both P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: We found that high-volume surgeons were more likely to perform a meniscal repair and less likely to have their patients admitted postoperatively, which was the second largest cost driver of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. They were also significantly less likely to use an allograft, especially in patients younger than the age of 18 years. High-volume surgeons had lower costs despite greater rates of concomitant procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective cohort study.

Opioid-Limiting Regulation: Effect on Patients Undergoing Knee and Shoulder Arthroscopy.

PURPOSE: To determine the effect prescription-limiting legislation passed in Rhode Island has had on opioids prescribed following arthroscopic knee and shoulder surgery at various time points, up to 90 days postoperatively. METHODS: All patients undergoing the 3 most common arthroscopic procedures at our institution (anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, partial meniscectomy, and rotator cuff repair) were included. Patients were selected from 2 6-month study periods (prepassage and postimplementation of the law). The state's Prescription Drug Monitoring Program database was queried for controlled substances filled in the perioperative period (from 30 days preoperatively to 90 days postoperatively). Multiple logistic regressions were used to identify predictors of chronic (>30 days) opioid use. RESULTS: The morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) prescribed in the initial postoperative script decreased from 319.04 (∼43 5-mg oxycodone tablets) in the prepassage to 152.45 MMEs (∼20 5-mg oxycodone tablets) in the postimplementation group (P < .001). The total MMEs filled in the first 30 days decreased from 520.93 to 299.94 MMEs (∼70 to ∼40 5-mg oxycodone tablets) (P < .001). MMEs filled between 30 and 90 days fell by 22.5% for all patients in this study; however, this change was not statistically significant (P = .263). Preoperative opioid use (odds ratio, 10.85; P < .001) and preoperative benzodiazepine use (odds ratio, 2.13; P = .005) predicted chronic opioid use postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: State opioid-limiting legislation reduced cumulative MMEs following arthroscopic knee and shoulder surgery in the first 30 days. Further research assessing the impact of this legislation on postoperative pain control, patient satisfaction, and functional outcomes following surgery is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, case-control study.

Biomechanical and Computed Tomography Analysis of Adjustable Femoral Cortical Fixation Devices for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in a Cadaveric Human Knee Model.

PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare two adjustable femoral cortical suspensory fixation devices used for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction through a novel, direct computed tomography (CT) analysis metric and biomechanical laxity testing in a matched cadaveric human knee study. METHODS: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions with bovine tendon grafts were performed using two adjustable femoral cortical suspensory fixation devices (RigidLoop Adjustable [DePuy Synthes Mitek, Raynham, MA] and TightRope [Arthrex, Naples, FL]) in 12 knees (6 matched pairs). A mechanical testing series was used to determine each knee's laxity in the intact condition. After reconstruction, each specimen was again tested for laxity and also imaged with CT. The laxity testing and CT imaging were then repeated after 1,000 cycles of anteroposterior loading on each knee to compare changes in laxity for the two fixation devices and to visualize changes in button-to-graft distance migration through a three-dimensional CT imaging method. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the two fixation groups' laxity measures after reconstruction (all P values ≥ .620) or after cycling (all P values ≥ .211) at any flexion angle. In addition, no significant differences were found between the two groups regarding button-to-graft distance migration (P = .773; mean, 0.61 ± 0.6 mm [95% confidence interval, -0.1 to 1.3 mm] in RigidLoop Adjustable group and 0.53 ± 0.6 mm [95% confidence interval, -0.1 to 1.2 mm] in TightRope group). CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences between the two femoral cortical suspensory adjustable-loop devices regarding laxity outcomes or loop displacement as measured by button-to-graft distance migration. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Use of either of the adjustable-loop cortical suspensory devices in our analysis would appear to produce similar, acceptable laxity outcomes and minimal effects in terms of device-related loop displacement.

Mechanical properties of revision ACL reconstruction.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the mechanical properties of a revision anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction after redrilling the original tibial bone tunnel through a retained composite screw compared with initial soft tissue graft fixation. A total of 24 porcine tendons were fixed to porcine tibial tunnels with a 10 × 35 mm composite interference screw. Following the pullout test, a revision tunnel was drilled through the first interference screw and a second graft was fixed in the bone tunnel using a larger composite screw (11 × 35 mm). Following insertion of the revision screw, the graft was reloaded as described for the primary reconstruction. Load versus displacement data were recorded for each test. There were no significant differences between the primary and revision reconstruction constructs for yield load (p = 0.62), linear stiffness (p = 0.18), maximum failure load (p = 0.57), and yield displacement (p = 0.46). These results indicate that the mechanical properties of tibial fixation for ACL reconstruction with a composite screw following a revision provide similar fixation compared with initial reconstruction in this model. Revising a failed composite ACL construct by means of overdrilling and reinstrumenting may provide fixation equivalent to the initial reconstruction.

Effect of interference screw fixation on ACL graft tensile strength.

Tibial-sided fixation of soft tissue grafts in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has often been identified as the weak link in the fixation construct, with interference screws being a commonly used technique. A significant concern surrounding the use of interference screws for soft tissue fixation is graft laceration and the possibility of loss of pull-out strength and slippage. The act of interference screw insertion for soft tissue graft fixation in ACL reconstruction alters the biomechanical properties of the graft. Two groups of 12 porcine knees (24 total) were utilized for the tibial-sided fixation of porcine flexor digitorum tendons using single-insertion interference screws, in a model of soft tissue ACL reconstruction. Two different screw types were used for comparison. Following screw insertion, the grafts were dissected free and underwent biomechanical testing in tension to failure. Control flexor digitorum tendons underwent the same biomechanical testing for comparison. Control soft tissue grafts exhibited significantly higher yield load, ultimate load, and stiffness (p < 0.001) in comparison to both groups of treated grafts, without evidence of significant macroscopic damage. Single insertion of interference screws for soft tissue graft fixation in ACL reconstruction weakens the biomechanical properties of the graft itself.

Arthroscopic Training: Historical Insights and Future Directions.

Arthroscopy is an orthopaedic technique that provides surgical solutions in a minimally invasive fashion. Since its introduction, arthroscopy has become a preferred surgical approach for treating various orthopaedic pathologies, such as meniscal tears, anterior cruciate ligament ruptures, rotator cuff tears, and wrist, elbow, ankle, and hip conditions. Despite its ubiquity, surgical training in arthroscopy poses several challenges for educators and trainees. Arthroscopy involves neuromotor skills which differ from those of open surgery, such as the principles of triangulation, bimanual dexterity, and the ability to navigate a three-dimensional space on a two-dimensional screen. There remains no universally implemented curriculum for arthroscopic education within orthopaedic residency or fellowship training programs, permitting the potential for highly variable training experiences from institution to institution. Therefore, the current review seeks to highlight the history of arthroscopic education, strategies and current teaching modalities in modern arthroscopic education, and avenues for future educational pathways.

Resilience in Residency and Beyond.

¼ Distinct from the burnout and wellness continuum, resilience is a developed and refined characteristic that propels an individual toward personal and professional success.¼ We propose a clinical resilience triangle consisting of 3 components that define resilience: grit, competence, and hope.¼ Resilience is a dynamic trait that should be built during residency and constantly fortified in independent practice so that orthopaedic surgeons may acquire and hone the skills and mental fortitude required to take on the overwhelming challenges that we all inevitably face.

Role of Quadriceps Tendon Autograft in Primary and Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

¼ The quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft is becoming increasingly popular in both primary and revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).¼ The biomechanical properties of the QT are similar to those of the native ACL, the hamstring tendon (HT), and bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) autografts.¼ QT autograft allows surgeons to be flexible with their graft size and reconstruction technique.¼ The QT autograft performs in a similar fashion to the BTB and HT autografts, with excellent patient-reported outcomes, consistent postoperative knee stability, and low rates of postoperative complications including graft failure and donor site morbidity.¼ There are emerging data that the QT autograft is a viable option in revision ACLR.

Risk Factors and Outcomes for Preoperative Stiffness Requiring Intervention Before Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Background: To date, there is a scarcity of literature related to the incidence of prolonged stiffness after an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear that requires manipulation under anesthesia/lysis of adhesions (MUA/LOA) in the preoperative period before ACL reconstruction (ACLR) and how preoperative stiffness influences outcomes after ACLR. Hypothesis: Preoperative stiffness requiring MUA/LOA would increase the risk for postoperative stiffness, postoperative complications, and the need for subsequent procedures after ACLR. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The PearlDiver Research Program was used to identify patients who sustained an ACL tear and underwent ACLR using their respective International Classification of Diseases, 9th or 10th Revision, and Current Procedure Terminology (CPT) codes. Within this group, patients with preoperative stiffness were identified using the CPT codes for MUA or LOA. Significant risk factors for preoperative stiffness were identified through univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Outcomes after ACLR were analyzed between patients with and without preoperative stiffness using multivariate logistic regression, controlling for age, sex, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index. Results: Between 2008 and 2018, 187,071 patients who underwent ACLR were identified. Of these patients, 241 (0.13%) underwent MUA/LOA before ACLR. Patients with preoperative stiffness began preoperative physical therapy significantly later than patients without stiffness (P = .0478) and had a delay in time to ACLR (P = .0003). Univariate logistic regression demonstrated that female sex, older age, anxiety/depression, obesity, and anticoagulation use were significant risk factors for preoperative stiffness (P < .05 for all). After multivariate regression, anticoagulation use was the only independent risk factor deemed significant (odds ratio, 6.69 [95% CI, 4.01-10.51]; P < .001). Patients with preoperative stiffness were at an increased risk of experiencing postoperative stiffness, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, surgical-site infection, and septic knee arthritis after ACLR (P < .05 for all). Conclusion: Although the risk of preoperative stiffness requiring an MUA/LOA before ACLR is low, the study findings indicated that patients with preoperative stiffness were at increased risk for postoperative complications compared with patients with no stiffness before ACLR.

Preoperative Risk Factors for Subsequent Ipsilateral ACL Revision Surgery After an ACL Restoration Procedure.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision surgery is challenging for both patients and surgeons. Understanding the risk factors for failure after bridge-enhanced ACL restoration (BEAR) may help with patient selection for ACL restoration versus ACL reconstruction. PURPOSE: To identify the preoperative risk factors for ACL revision surgery within the first 2 years after BEAR. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Data from the prospective BEAR I, II, and III trials were used to determine the preoperative risk factors for ACL revision surgery. All patients with a complete ACL tear (aged 13-47 years, depending on the trial), who met all other inclusion/exclusion criteria and underwent a primary BEAR procedure within 30 to 50 days from the injury (dependent on the trial), were included. Demographic data (age, sex, body mass index), baseline patient-reported outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] subjective score, Marx activity score), preoperative imaging results (ACL stump length, notch size, tibial slope), and intraoperative findings (knee hyperextension, meniscal status) were evaluated to determine their contribution to the risk of ipsilateral ACL revision surgery. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients, with a median age of 17.6 years (interquartile range, 16-23 years), including 67 (54%) female patients, met study criteria. Overall, 18 (15%) patients required ACL revision surgery in the first 2 years after the BEAR procedure. On bivariate analyses, younger age (P = .011), having a contact injury at the time of the initial tear (P = .048), and increased medial tibial slope (MTS; P = .029) were associated with a higher risk of ipsilateral revision surgery. Multivariable logistic regression analyses identified 2 independent predictors of revision: patient age and MTS. The odds of ipsilateral revision surgery were decreased by 32% for each 1-year increase in age (odds ratio, 0.684 [95% CI, 0.517-0.905]; P = .008) and increased by 28% for each 1° increase in MTS (odds ratio, 1.280 [95% CI, 1.024-1.601]; P = .030). Sex, baseline IKDC or Marx score, knee hyperextension, and meniscal status were not significant predictors of revision. CONCLUSION: Younger age and higher MTS were predictors of ipsilateral ACL revision surgery after the BEAR procedure. Younger patients with higher tibial slopes should be aware of the increased risk for revision surgery when deciding to undergo ACL restoration.

Quantitative MRI Biomarkers to Predict Risk of Reinjury Within 2 Years After Bridge-Enhanced ACL Restoration.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (qMRI) methods were developed to establish the integrity of healing anterior cruciate ligaments (ACLs) and grafts. Whether qMRI variables predict risk of reinjury is unknown. PURPOSE: To determine if qMRI measures at 6 to 9 months after bridge-enhanced ACL restoration (BEAR) can predict the risk of revision surgery within 2 years of the index procedure. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Originally, 124 patients underwent ACL restoration as part of the BEAR I, BEAR II, and BEAR III prospective trials and had consented to undergo an MRI of the surgical knee 6 to 9 months after surgery. Only 1 participant was lost to follow-up, and 4 did not undergo MRI, leaving a total of 119 patients for this study. qMRI techniques were used to determine the mean cross-sectional area; normalized signal intensity; and a qMRI-based predicted failure load, which was calculated using a prespecified equation based on cross-sectional area and normalized signal intensity. Patient-reported outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score), clinical measures (hamstring strength, quadriceps strength, and side-to-side knee laxity), and functional outcomes (single-leg hop) were also measured at 6 to 9 months after surgery. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to determine the odds ratios (ORs) for revision surgery based on the qMRI and non-imaging variables. Patient age and medial posterior tibial slope values were included as covariates. RESULTS: In total, 119 patients (97%), with a median age of 17.6 years, underwent MRI between 6 and 9 months postoperatively. Sixteen of 119 patients (13%) required revision ACL surgery. In univariate analyses, higher International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score at 6 to 9 months postoperatively (OR = 1.66 per 10-point increase; P = .035) and lower qMRI-based predicted failure load (OR = 0.66 per 100-N increase; P = .014) were associated with increased risk of revision surgery. In the multivariable model, when adjusted for age and posterior tibial slope, the qMRI-based predicted failure load was the only significant predictor of revision surgery (OR = 0.71 per 100 N; P = .044). CONCLUSION: Quantitative MRI-based predicted failure load of the healing ACL was a significant predictor of the risk of revision within 2 years after BEAR surgery. The current findings highlight the potential utility of early qMRI in the postoperative management of patients undergoing the BEAR procedure.

A Review of Abductor Tendon Tears: The Hidden Lesion of the Hip.

¼: Greater trochanteric pain syndrome consists of a group of associated conditions involving the lateral hip that can be debilitating to patients, mostly women between ages 40 and 60 years. ¼: Abductor tendon tears are becoming a more recognized cause of lateral hip pain in patients without hip osteoarthritis. ¼: Diagnosis of this condition is critical to patient care because misdiagnosis often leads to unnecessary prolonged pain and even unnecessary procedures that address different pathologies. ¼: Treatment strategies consists of nonoperative modalities such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications, corticosteroid injections, and physical therapy, but for refractory cases, surgical techniques including repair, augmentation, and reconstruction have been well-described in the literature providing patients with acceptable outcomes.

Effects of Initial Graft Tension and Patient Sex on Knee Osteoarthritis Outcomes After ACL Reconstruction: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial With 10- to 12-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The initial graft tension applied during anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) graft fixation may promote posttraumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA). PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: This study sought to assess the effect of initial graft tension and patient sex on PTOA outcomes at 10 to 12 years after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). The hypothesis was that there would be no group- or sex-based differences in outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive ACLR with a low or high initial graft tension. Outcomes were evaluated at 10 to 12 years postoperatively and compared with a matched, uninjured control group. Outcomes included clinical assessments (anteroposterior [AP] knee laxity measurement, International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC] examination score), a functional assessment (single-leg hop for distance), patient-reported outcomes (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, Tegner activity level, patient satisfaction), and PTOA imaging (Osteoarthritis Research Society International [OARSI] radiographic score and Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score [WORMS]). Two-way mixed-model analyses of variance were used to evaluate differences in outcomes between tension groups and the control group and between female and male patients. RESULTS: Both tension groups scored worse than the control group for the IKDC examination (P≤ .021), KOOS (Pain, Activities of Daily Living, Sport/Recreation, and Quality of Life subscales) (P≤ .049), and WORMS difference score (P≤ .042). The low-tension group scored worse than the control group for KOOS Symptoms (P = .016) and the OARSI difference score (P = .015). The index limb had worse scores than the contralateral limb within the high-tension group for AP laxity (P = .030) and hop deficit (P = .011). This result was also observed within both tension groups for the WORMS (P≤ .050) and within the low-tension group for the OARSI score (P = .001). Male patients had higher Tegner scores (mean ± SE) relative to female patients (male, 5.49 ± 1.88; female, 4.45 ± 1.65) and worse OARSI difference scores (male, 1.89 ± 5.38; female, 0.244 ± 0.668) (P = .007 and .034, respectively). However, no significant differences were detected between tension groups for any of the outcomes measured. CONCLUSION: Overall, ACLR failed to prevent PTOA regardless of initial graft tension. However, male patients treated with a low initial graft tension may be at greater risk for PTOA. These results do not support the hypothesis of no sex differences in outcomes at 10 to 12 years after ACLR.

Design Features and Rationale of the BEAR-MOON (Bridge-Enhanced ACL Restoration Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network) Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: BEAR (bridge-enhanced anterior cruciate ligament [ACL] restoration), a paradigm-shifting technology to heal midsubstance ACL tears, has been demonstrated to be effective in a single-center 2:1 randomized controlled trial (RCT) versus hamstring ACL reconstruction. Widespread dissemination of BEAR into clinical practice should also be informed by a multicenter RCT to demonstrate exportability and compare efficacy with bone--patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) ACL reconstruction, another clinically standard treatment. PURPOSE: To present the design and initial preparation of a multicenter RCT of BEAR versus BPTB ACL reconstruction (the BEAR: Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network [BEAR-MOON] trial). Design and analytic issues in planning the complex BEAR-MOON trial, involving the US National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, the US Food and Drug Administration, the BEAR implant manufacturer, a data and safety monitoring board, and institutional review boards, can usefully inform both clinicians on the trial's strengths and limitations and future investigators on planning of complex orthopaedic studies. STUDY DESIGN: Clinical trial. METHODS: We describe the distinctive clinical, methodological, and operational challenges of comparing the innovative BEAR procedure with the well-established BPTB operation, and we outline the clinical motivation, experimental setting, study design, surgical challenges, rehabilitation, outcome measures, and planned analysis of the BEAR-MOON trial. RESULTS: BEAR-MOON is a 6-center, 12-surgeon, 200-patient randomized, partially blinded, noninferiority RCT comparing BEAR with BPTB ACL reconstruction for treating first-time midsubstance ACL tears. Noninferiority of BEAR relative to BPTB will be claimed if the total score on the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee evaluation form and the knee arthrometer 30-lb (13.61-kg) side-to-side laxity difference are both within respective margins of 16 points for the IKDC and 2.5 mm for knee laxity. CONCLUSION: Major issues include patient selection, need for intraoperative randomization and treatment-specific postoperative physical therapy regimens (because of fundamental differences in surgical technique, initial stability construct, and healing), and choice of noninferiority margins for short-term efficacy outcomes of a novel intervention with evident short-term advantages and theoretical, but unverified, long-term benefits on other dimensions.

Posttraumatic stress disorders in civilian orthopaedics.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a well-characterized anxiety disorder that may occur after exposure to a traumatic event. Research is ongoing to document neuroanatomic, neuroendocrine, and genetic correlates to the behavioral phenotype. PTSD occurs in 20% to 51% of patients with musculoskeletal injury. Orthopaedic outcomes, including return to work, activities of daily living, patient perception of physical recovery, and objective physical parameters, suffer considerably in patients with PTSD. There are several ways by which treating orthopaedic surgeons can recognize at-risk patients and help prevent the development of PTSD. Should prevention prove unsuccessful, effective treatment strategies exist, as well. Research is needed to investigate whether a correlation exists between successful management of the psychiatric manifestations of PTSD and improved physical outcomes.

Contact area and pressure in suture bridge rotator cuff repair using knotless lateral anchors.

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether the use of knotless lateral anchors in a suture bridge construct produces better contact area and pressure parameters than a suture bridge construct with standard lateral anchors that require knots or a double-row repair. The hypothesis was that knotless lateral anchors would produce better contact area and pressure parameters than the other two constructs. METHODS: A total of fifteen matched pairs of cadaveric shoulders were divided into three groups. In Group 1, a suture bridge using knotless anchors for the lateral row was performed on five shoulders. A suture bridge using standard lateral row anchors that require knots was performed on the contralateral shoulders. In Group 2, suture bridge with knotless lateral row anchors was compared with double-row repair. In Group 3, suture bridge using standard lateral row anchors was compared with double-row repair. The contact conditions of the rotator cuff footprint were measured using pressure-sensitive film. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between any of the techniques regarding contact area F(2, 15.7) = 3.09, P = 0.07 or mean contact pressure F(2, 15.1) = 2.35, P = 0.12. A post hoc power analysis suggests differences between techniques are likely less than 91-113 mm(2) for area and 0.071-0.089 N for pressure. CONCLUSIONS: The use of knotless anchors in the lateral row of a suture bridge repair did not increase the footprint contact area or contact pressure when compared to a suture bridge repair requiring knots laterally or to a double-row repair.

The role of magnetic resonance imaging in evaluating postoperative ACL reconstruction healing and graft mechanical properties: a new criterion for return to play?

Background: Disruption of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is a common injury. In active patients, it is routinely treated with ACL reconstruction surgery. Following reconstruction, one of the critical decisions that must be made is the optimal timing of return to sport. While many biomechanical, biological, and functional criteria have been proposed to determine return to play, these methods are limited at best.Reasoning: As criteria for return to play are multifactorial, there is a growing need for noninvasive technologies, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), to objectively track graft healing, to better assess the graft itself. Measuring the changes in the strength of the healing ligament has been shown to be a reliable means of objectively documenting graft healing in preclinical studies. While the initial studies of MR-based modeling of ACL graft healing are promising, this technology is still in its infancy and requires optimization.Purpose: The goals of this review are: 1) to outline the shortcomings of current return to play criteria, 2) to highlight the ability of MRI to determine the status of ACL graft healing, and 3) to discuss the future of imaging technology to determine return to play and its potential role in the clinical evaluation of patientsConclusion: There continues to be a wide variabiltiy regarding adequate return to play criteria, most of which are subjective in nature.

Long-term outcomes of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery: 2020 OREF clinical research award paper.

ACL injuries place the knee at risk for post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) despite surgical anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. One parameter thought to affect PTOA risk is the initial graft tension. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was designed to compare outcomes between two graft tensioning protocols that bracket the range commonly used. At 7 years postsurgery, we determined that most outcomes between the two tension groups were not significantly different, that they were inferior to an uninjured matched control group, and that PTOA was progressing in both groups relative to controls. The trial database was also leveraged to gain insight into mechanisms of PTOA following ACL injury. We determined that the inflammatory response at the time of injury undermines one of the joint's lubricating mechanisms. We learned that patients continue to protect their surgical knee 5 years postinjury compared to controls during a jump-pivot activity. We also established that presurgical knee function and mental health were correlated with symptomatic PTOA at 7 years, that there were specific anatomical factors associated with poor outcomes, and that there were no changes in outcomes due to tunnel widening in patients receiving hamstring tendon autografts. We also validated a magnetic resonance imaging technique to noninvasively assess graft strength. In conclusion, the RCT determined that initial graft tensioning does not have a major influence on 7-year outcomes. Therefore, surgeons can reconstruct the ACL using a graft tensioning protocol that is within the window of the two graft tensioning techniques evaluated in this RCT.