The effect of concurrent cervical spine degenerative disease on the outcome of rotator cuff repair: a national database study.

BACKGROUND: Cervical spine degenerative disease (CSD) can cause shoulder pain, potentially confounding the management of patients with rotator cuff tears. This study aimed to investigate the relationships between CSD and rotator cuff repair (RCR). METHODS: A national administrative database (PearlDiver) was used to study 4 patient cohorts: (1) RCR only (RCRo), (2) RCR with concurrent CSD (RCRC), (3) RCR after a cervical spine procedure (RCRA), and (4) RCR before a cervical spine procedure (RCRB). The outcomes of RCR were compared using multivariable logistic regression, controlling for age, sex, and Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, as well as preoperative opioid utilization in the analysis of opioid use. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2021, a total of 889,977 patients underwent RCR. Of these patients, 784,230 (88%) underwent RCRo whereas 105,747 (12%) underwent RCRC, of whom 21,585 (2.4%) underwent cervical spine procedures (RCRA in 9670 [1.1%] and RCRB in 11,915 [1.3%]). At 2 years after RCR, compared with RCRo patients, RCRC patients had an increased risk of surgical-site infection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.25, P = .0004), deep vein thrombosis (aOR = 1.17, P = .0002), respiratory complications (aOR = 1.19, P = .0164), and ipsilateral shoulder reoperations (débridement [aOR = 1.66, P < .0001], manipulation under anesthesia or arthroscopic lysis of adhesions [aOR = 1.23, P < .0001], distal clavicle excision [aOR = 1.78, P < .0001], subacromial decompression [aOR = 1.72, P < .0001], biceps tenodesis [aOR = 1.76, P < .0001], incision and drainage [aOR = 1.34, P = .0020], synovectomy [aOR = 1.48, P = .0136], conversion to shoulder arthroplasty [aOR = 1.62, P < .0001], revision RCR [aOR = 1.77, P < .0001], and subsequent contralateral RCR [aOR = 1.71, P < .0001]). At 2 years, compared with RCRC patients who did not undergo cervical spine procedures, RCRC patients who underwent cervical spine procedures had an increased risk of incision and drainage (aOR = 1.50, P = .0255), conversion to arthroplasty (aOR = 1.40, P < .0001), and revision RCR (aOR = 1.11, P = .0374), as well as a lower risk of contralateral RCR (aOR = 0.89, P = .0469). The sequence of cervical spine procedures did not affect the risk of shoulder reoperations. At 1 year, the risk of opioid use after RCR was less for RCRA patients compared with RCRB patients (aOR = 1.71 [95% confidence interval, 1.61-1.80; P < .0001] vs. aOR = 2.01 [95% confidence interval, 1.92-2.12; P < .0001]). CONCLUSION: Concurrent CSD has significant detrimental effects on RCR outcomes. Patients with concurrent CSD undergoing cervical spine procedures have a greater risk of ipsilateral shoulder reoperations but a decreased risk of contralateral RCR. The risk of prolonged opioid use was lower if RCR followed a cervical spine procedure. Concurrent CSD must be considered and possibly treated to optimize the outcomes of RCR.

Trends in reported outcomes and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in humeral shaft fracture literature: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: With a lack of standardization among outcome measures in fracture literature, cross-study comparisons remain limited. This systematic review aimed to identify trends in outcome measures reported by studies of the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. METHODS: A systematic review was performed of studies reporting clinical outcomes of humeral shaft fractures indexed in PubMed. Extracted data included demographics, fracture characteristics, treatment modalities, outcomes, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), and journal characteristics. Cochran-Armitage tests and linear regressions were used to identify data trends. Pearson chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for comparisons between studies. RESULTS: This review included 197 studies with outcomes of 15,445 humeral shaft fractures. 126 studies reported PROMs and 37 different PROMs were used. The Constant Score was most commonly reported (34% of studies), followed by ASES Score (21%), MEPS (21%), and DASH Score (20%). There was a significant increase in PROM usage over time (p = 0.016) and in articles using three or more PROMs (p = 0.005). The number of PROMs were significantly greater in prospective cohort studies and RCTs (p = 0.012) compared to retrospective cohort studies and case series (p = 0.044 for both). Post-treatment shoulder motion was reported in 43% of studies and 34% reported elbow motion. 86% of studies reported complications as an outcome parameter. Time to union and nonunion rate were published in 69% and 88% of studies, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study identified increasing PROM usage over time and disparities in the reporting of outcomes in humeral shaft fracture literature requiring further validation and standardization of available outcome measures.

Biomechanical Comparison of Dual and Posterior Locking Plates in an Ex Vivo Comminuted Olecranon Fracture Model.

PURPOSE: Comminuted olecranon fractures are commonly fixed with posterior locking plates (PLPs). Though biomechanically validated, this method comes with risks of symptomatic implant prominence and wound breakdown. Dual locking plates (DLPs) placed on the medial and lateral surfaces of the olecranon theoretically avoid these risks and allow for fixation of proximal fracture fragments in multiple planes. A biomechanical comparison of DLP and PLP fixation would help to validate the use of DLPs in comminuted olecranon fractures. METHODS: Seven matched pairs of cadaveric upper extremities were evaluated with quantitative computed tomography scans to evaluate bone mineral density (BMD). Osteotomies simulating comminuted olecranon fractures (Mayo Type IIB) were created and the specimens were fixed either with variable angle PLPs or variable angle DLPs. The specimens were then cyclically loaded and loaded to failure. The ultimate strength, fracture displacement, and mechanism of failure were recorded and compared across groups. The correlation between BMD and ultimate strength was analyzed. RESULTS: The mean total BMD was 0.79 g/cm2 (SD, 0.14 g/cm2). No specimen failed during cyclic testing. Five of 7 PLP specimens and 5 of 7 DLP specimens failed by fracture through the proximal screws though in different planes (sagittal vs axial splits, respectively). The mean ultimate strengths of the PLP (1077 N [SD, 462 N]) and DLP (1241 N [SD, 506 N]) groups were similar. There was a linear relationship between ultimate strength and BMD (R2 = 0.33). CONCLUSION: Dual locking plates display biomechanical properties that suggest that they can be used in the fixation of comminuted olecranon fractures. Catastrophic failure of the fixation constructs occurs around stress risers at the proximal screws rather than due to displacement at the fracture itself. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Dual locking plate constructs can be considered for use in the fixation of comminuted olecranon fractures.

Early outcome of humeral head replacement with glenoid reaming arthroplasty (Ream and Run) for treatment of advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term outcomes of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) can be compromised by glenoid loosening and failure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short- and midterm outcomes of humeral head replacement with glenoid reaming arthroplasty (Ream and Run) for the treatment of advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis, and to identify associations between preoperative factors and outcomes. METHODS: Forty-nine shoulders (mean age 60 ± 7 years) with minimum 2-year follow-up (mean 4.6 ± 1.7) were evaluated. Forty-three (87.8%) were male. Thirteen (26.5%) had previous nonarthroplasty shoulder surgery. There were 19 (38.8%) Walch type A and 30 (61.2%) type B glenoids. Pre- and postoperative shoulder motion, patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were assessed. Pre- and postoperative plain radiographs were evaluated. Mixed effects models were used to investigate factors associated with outcomes. RESULTS: Active forward elevation and active external rotation improved from 111.7° ± 23.8° to 139.2° ± 21.1° and 13.3° ± 20.7° to 38.7° ± 14.7°, respectively (P < .001). The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and visual analog scale (VAS) shoulder pain scores at the most recent follow-up were 86.6 ± 19.9, 10.1 ± 14.1, 10.5 ± 2.2, and 1.5 ± 2.3, respectively. The mean changes of PROMs were significant and exceeded the minimal clinically important difference for aTSA. The percentage maximal possible improvement for ASES, DASH, and SST were greater than 75%. Male sex (P < .008) and not having prior shoulder surgery (P < .04) were significantly associated with better absolute and greater change in PROMs. Age, preoperative shoulder motion, and Walch glenoid classification were not associated with PROMs. Five (10.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8%-18.6%) patients underwent revision for pain. Three additional patients were dissatisfied at final follow-up without undergoing revision, resulting in 16.7% (95% CI 6.1%-27.2%) of patients being dissatisfied with their outcome after their initial RnR. Mean Short Form-6 Dimensions scores improved from 0.66 ± 0.12 to 0.77 ± 0.13 and mean EuroQol-5 Dimensions scores improved from 0.68 ± 0.20 to 0.85 ± 0.17 (P < .001). Improvement in HRQoL was significantly associated with nondominant arm treatment, increased age, and greater preoperative SST score. Annual medialization of the humeral head center of rotation was 0.56 ± 1.6 mm/yr. No radiographic measure was associated with long-term PROMs. CONCLUSION: Ream and Run can provide significant and clinically important improvement in PROMs and HRQoL for a high percentage of patients at short- and midterm follow-up. This procedure is an appropriate alternative to aTSA in select patients.

Outcome measures reported for the management of proximal humeral fractures: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons multicenter taskforce studying proximal humerus fractures reached no consensus on which outcome measures to include in future studies, and currently no gold standard exists. Knowledge of commonly used outcome measures will allow standardization, enabling more consistent proximal humerus fracture treatment comparison. This study identifies the most commonly reported outcome measures for proximal humerus fracture management in recent literature. METHODS: A systematic review identified all English-language articles assessing proximal humerus fractures from 2008 to 2018 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Review articles, meta-analyses, revision surgery, chronic injuries, studies with <15 patients, studies with <12 month follow-up, anatomic/biomechanical studies, and technique articles were excluded. Included studies were assessed for patient demographics and outcome scores, patient satisfaction, complications, range of motion, and strength. RESULTS: Of 655 articles, 74 met inclusion criteria. The number of proximal humerus fractures averaged 74.2 per study (mean patient age, 65.6 years). Mean follow-up was 30.7 months. Neer type 1, 2, 3, and 4 fractures were included in 8%, 51%, 81%, and 88% of studies, respectively. Twenty-two patient-reported outcome instruments were used including the Constant-Murley score (65%), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score (31%), visual analog scale pain (27%), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (18%). An average of 2.2 measures per study were reported. CONCLUSION: Considerable variability exists in the use of outcome measures across the proximal humerus fracture literature, making treatment comparison challenging. We recommend that future literature on proximal humerus fractures use at least 3 outcomes measures and 1 general health score until the optimal scores are determined.

Shoulder arthroplasty options in young (<50 years old) patients: review of current concepts.

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic shoulder arthroplasty provides excellent pain relief and functional restoration for patients with glenohumeral arthritis, but concerns of survivorship have limited its use in younger patients. DISCUSSION: Despite general reports of high long-term survivorship, implant failure and functional deterioration after total shoulder arthroplasty are major concerns in the management of younger patients. In addition to having a longer life expectancy, younger patients also tend to be more active and can be expected to place greater demands on their shoulder arthroplasty. CONCLUSION: Alternative strategies have been developed and used for shoulder arthroplasty in younger patients. This manuscript reviews current concepts of shoulder arthroplasty in young patients.

Leukocyte esterase in the diagnosis of shoulder periprosthetic joint infection.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is difficult to diagnose with traditional methods. Leukocyte esterase (LE) has recently proven to be reliable in knee arthroplasty; however, its value in the shoulder has not been explored. We hypothesized that LE would display high sensitivity and specificity in shoulder PJI. METHODS: Two groups were prospectively evaluated: 45 primary and 40 revision shoulder arthroplasties. Synovial fluid and soft tissue cultures were obtained at surgery. Synovial fluid was evaluated with LE test strips. Any aspiration that contained erythrocytes was centrifuged and retested. Shoulder PJI was defined by modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. RESULTS: Of 5 primaries with positive tissue cultures (11%), only 1 was positive for LE. Of 16 revisions with positive cultures (40%), 4 had positive LE results. Among all patients with bacterial isolates, 6 aspirates were not interpretable (29%), despite centrifugation. LE had sensitivity of 25% and specificity of 75% to predict positive cultures in revisions. Ten revision patients met modified MSIS criteria for PJI. The sensitivity of LE in these patients was 30%, and the specificity was 67% (positive predictive value, 43%; negative predictive value, 83%). If bloody aspirates were considered positive, LE sensitivity in MSIS PJI increased to 60%, but the positive predictive value fell to 37.5%. CONCLUSION: LE is an unreliable diagnostic measure in shoulder PJI. The presence of erythrocytes within aspirates further decreased its accuracy. We conclude that LE should not be used for the routine identification of shoulder PJI.

Use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in the Medicare population.

BACKGROUND: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has been Food and Drug Administration approved in the United States since 2004 but did not obtain a unique code until 2010. Therefore, the use of this popular procedure has yet to be reported. The purpose of this study was to examine the use and reimbursement of RSA compared with total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and shoulder hemiarthroplasty (SHA). METHODS: We analyzed the 100% sample of the 2011 Medicare Part A claims data for patients aged 65 years or older. Patient demographic characteristics, diagnoses, provider information, reimbursements, and lengths of stay were extracted from the claims data. RESULTS: In 2011, a total of 31,002 shoulder arthroplasty procedures were performed; 37% were RSAs, 42% were TSAs, and 21% were SHAs. Osteoarthritis was the primary diagnosis code in 91% of TSAs, 37% of SHAs, and 45% of RSAs. A primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis with no secondary code for rotator cuff tear was found in 22% of patients undergoing RSA. The mean length of stay for RSA (2.6 days; SD, 2.1 days) was longer than that for TSA (2.1 days; SD, 1.5 days) and shorter than that for SHA (3.5 days; SD, 3.6 days) (P < .001). Lower-volume surgeons (<10 arthroplasties per year) performed most shoulder arthroplasties: 57% of RSAs, 65% of TSAs, and 97% of SHAs. Seventy percent of RSAs were implanted by surgeons who performed more RSAs than TSAs and SHAs combined. CONCLUSIONS: RSA is performed with similar frequency to TSA and almost twice as much as SHA in the Medicare population. Lower-volume surgeons perform most RSAs, and a majority of surgeons perform more RSAs than all anatomic shoulder arthroplasties combined.

Factors affecting hospital charges after total shoulder arthroplasty: an evaluation of the National Inpatient Sample database.

BACKGROUND: The number of total shoulder arthroplasties (TSA) performed in the United States increases yearly. At the same time, cost containment in health care continues to be a major concern. Therefore, it is imperative to identify specific variables that affect the cost of shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: The U.S. National Inpatient Sample database was queried (1993-2010) to evaluate total hospital charges for shoulder arthroplasty. Etiology of arthritis, multiple medical comorbidities, and patient and hospital demographics were evaluated for their effect on total inpatient hospital charges by a multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Hospital charges for TSA increased from 1993 to 2010. Gender, race, and obesity were not associated with these differences in hospital charges. Post-traumatic and rheumatoid arthritis resulted in increased hospital charges; however, osteoarthritis resulted in decreased charges from the baseline. Multiple comorbidities (diabetes, lung disease, heart disease, and kidney disease) resulted in increased hospital charges after TSA. Regionally, the western and southern United States had the highest total charges above baseline. Larger hospitals and private urban hospitals also showed charges above baseline. CONCLUSIONS: The factors related to increased hospital charges after TSA are multifactorial and include medical comorbidities, patient demographics, and regionalization. As the future of health care continues to evolve, it is important for practitioners, legislators, insurance administrators, and hospitals to recognize factors that increase costs.

Optimizing Visualization in Shoulder Arthroscopy: An Evidence-Based Guide.

Advances in arthroscopy have contributed toward improved understanding and management of diverse pathological conditions in the shoulder. As a result, arthroscopy is often preferred by both patients and surgeons. However, surgery can be complicated by limited visualization. Techniques to improve visualization include patient and portal positioning, mechanical débridement, radiofrequency ablation, epinephrine added to irrigation fluid, tranexamic acid administration, and controlled hypotensive anesthesia. Despite published literature on each, a thorough understanding of the evidence supporting these techniques and adjuvants is essential to interpret the clinical utility of each.

Acute-on-Chronic Axillary Artery Thrombus After Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty for Failed Proximal Humerus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation: A Case Report.

CASE: A 71-year-old woman presented with post-traumatic arthritis 11 months after open reduction and internal fixation for a left proximal humerus fracture (PHF) dislocation. After revision to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), the patient's left upper extremity was found to be avascular. An emergent thrombectomy was performed with restoration of arterial flow after removal of an acute-on-chronic axillary artery thrombus. CONCLUSION: Although rare, as rTSA becomes more common for management of PHF, incidence of associated vascular injuries is likely to rise. Screening methods and clinical vigilance in diagnosis are advised for patients with anterior PHF dislocations and arterial injury risk factors.

Staged Repair of Bilateral Isolated Teres Major Tears: A Case Report.

CASE: A 58-year-old, very active man sustained bilateral isolated teres major (TM) tendon tears when his arms were forcefully elevated overhead while wakeboarding. Staged surgical repair was performed. A progressive rehabilitation protocol was followed, and he returned to high-level activities 7 months postoperatively. At 1-year follow-up, outcome measures for bilateral shoulders were DASH 0, SST 12, ASES 100, and EQ-5D 1.0. CONCLUSION: Despite literature supporting conservative treatment, this case demonstrates that operative treatment of acute, isolated TM tears can result in highly successful outcomes for motivated active patients.

Shoulder arthroscopy: basic principles of positioning, anesthesia, and portal anatomy.

Advances in modern arthroscopy have contributed significantly to greater flexibility and efficacy in addressing shoulder pathology. Advantages of arthroscopy include less invasive approaches, improved visualization, decreased risk of many postoperative complications, and faster recovery. As a result, arthroscopy is often preferred by both orthopaedic surgeons and patients. Common shoulder conditions that can be managed arthroscopically include rotator cuff tears, shoulder instability, and labral pathology. A thorough understanding of anatomic principles in conjunction with proper patient positioning and portal selection and placement are essential for successful arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

Comparison of Humeral-Head Replacement with Glenoid-Reaming Arthroplasty (Ream and Run) Versus Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Matched-Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Glenoid component failure is a major concern after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). Ream and run (RnR) is an alternative procedure that may avoid glenoid-related complications. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of RnR versus aTSA in younger patients with advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis. METHODS: This was a retrospective matched-cohort study of 110 patients who underwent aTSA and 57 patients who underwent RnR; patients were <66 years of age and had a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Propensity matching was performed using 21 preoperative variables. Pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) scores, satisfaction with outcome, and revision data were analyzed. Mixed-effects models examined the association of preoperative variables with outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patient pairs were matched. All patients were male, with a mean age of 58.6 ± 7.3 years and a mean follow-up 4.4 ± 2.3 years. The aTSA cohort had better final Simple Shoulder Test (SST) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores. However, in the mixed-effects model analysis, arthroplasty type was not associated with outcome. At 2 years postoperatively, a significantly greater percentage of aTSA patients achieved the substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for the ASES (100% versus 79.2%; p = 0.01) and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) (89.7% versus 75%; p = 0.02) for the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. At >5-year follow-up, there were no significant differences between the cohorts in the percentage who achieved the MCID, SCB, or patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for the ASES, SST, and VAS for pain. Three patients underwent revision arthroplasty for pain after RnR, at a mean of 1.9 ± 1.7 years. Two patients underwent revision arthroplasty for glenoid loosening at 9.2 and 14 years after aTSA. CONCLUSIONS: RnR and aTSA had comparable outcomes in most analyses. The greater early revision rate after RnR should focus attention on optimizing patient selection and postoperative management. Revision for glenoid loosening is a concern among younger and active patients. Longer-term study is needed to better understand the relative benefits and disadvantages of these procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Increased Risk of Periprosthetic Fractures and Revision Arthroplasty in Patients Undergoing Shoulder Arthroplasty With a History of Prior Fragility Fractures: A Matched Cohort Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: As rates of anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (SA) continue to grow, an increase in the number of osteoporotic patients undergoing SA, including those who have sustained prior fragility fractures, is expected. The purpose of this study was to examine short-term, implant-related complication rates and secondary fragility fractures after SA in patients with and without a history of fragility fractures. METHODS: A propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study was done using the PearlDiver database to characterize the effect of antecedent fragility fractures in short-term complications after SA. Rates of revision SA, periprosthetic fractures, infection, and postoperative fragility fractures were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Risks of these complications were also studied in patients with and without preoperative osteoporosis treatment. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 91,212 SA patients were identified, with 13,050 (14.3%) experiencing a fragility fracture within the 3 years before SA. Two years after SA, there were increased odds of periprosthetic fracture (odds ratio [OR] 2.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.68 to 2.99), fragility fracture (OR 9.11, 95% CI 8.43 to 9.85), deep infection (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.12), and all-cause revision SA (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.44 to 1.96) within those patients who had experienced a fragility fracture within 3 years before their SA. Patients who were treated for osteoporosis with bisphosphonates and/or vitamin D supplementation before their SA had similar rates of postoperative periprosthetic fractures, fragility fractures, and all-cause revision SA to those who did not receive pharmacologic treatment. CONCLUSION: Sustaining a fragility fracture before SA portends substantial postoperative risk of periprosthetic fractures, infection, subsequent fragility fractures, and all-cause revision SA at the 2-year postoperative period. Pharmacotherapy did not markedly decrease the rate of these complications. These results are important for surgeons counseling patients who have experienced prior fragility fractures on the risks of SA.

Large acetabular defects can be managed with cementless revision components.

BACKGROUND: Optimal techniques for acetabular revision in the setting of major pelvic osteolysis have not been established. Bilobed components, structural grafts, and reinforcement cages have demonstrated 10-24% midterm failure rates. While cementless hemispherical components have been utilized to treat large acetabular defects, most reports have not focused specifically on patients with extensive deficiencies. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We report midterm clinical scores, component revisions, and complications following focal bone grafting and cementless acetabular revision in cases with major periacetabular osteolysis. METHODS: We identified 30 patients (32 hips) who underwent cementless acetabular revision to treat massive acetabular bone loss at an average followup of 53 months. We excluded three patients lost to followup and two patients who died prior to minimum 24 month followup. Harris Hip Scores were assessed before and after surgery. Postoperative radiographs were evaluated for graft incorporation and component migration. Component revision and component migration are reported as failures. RESULTS: Mean Harris Hip Score improved from 52.5 (range, 17.7-90.7) to 87.3 (range, 25.3-100) points. Three hips (9%) were revised for aseptic loosening. Three components (10.7%) demonstrated radiographic migration, but were not revised. Complete graft incorporation was seen in 17 cases (68%). There were five major complications (14%). CONCLUSIONS: Cementless acetabular fixation and bone grafting result in clinical scores and survivorship comparable to other options at midterm followup, with potential for biological fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, clinical research study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Meniscal repair versus partial meniscectomy: a systematic review comparing reoperation rates and clinical outcomes.

PURPOSE: The aim of this investigation was to compare reoperation rates and clinical outcomes after meniscal repair and partial meniscectomy. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to identify outcome studies of arthroscopic meniscal repair (inside-out, outside-in, and all-inside techniques) or partial meniscectomy in patients with traumatic meniscal tears. The studies included patients with no previous injuries or operations. RESULTS: At short- and long-term follow-up, partial meniscectomy had a lower reoperation rate (1.4% [2 of 143] and 3.9% [52 of 1,319], respectively) than isolated meniscal repair (16.5% [47 of 284] and 20.7% [30 of 145], respectively). There was a slightly higher reoperation rate after partial lateral meniscectomy compared with partial medial meniscectomy. Repairs of the medial meniscus resulted in higher reoperation rates than repairs of the lateral meniscus. Meniscal repairs at the time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction had a lower failure rate than isolated repairs. In the limited number of studies with long-term clinical outcome scores, meniscal repair was associated with higher Lysholm scores and less radiologic degeneration than partial meniscectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas meniscal repairs have a higher reoperation rate than partial meniscectomies, they are associated with better long-term outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

Computer-Assisted Preoperative Planning and Patient-Specific Instrumentation for Glenoid Implants in Shoulder Arthroplasty.

¼: Glenoid component positioning affects implant survival after total shoulder arthroplasty, and accurate glenoid-component positioning is an important technical aspect. ¼: The use of virtual planning and patient-specific instrumentation has been shown to produce reliable implant placement in the laboratory and in some clinical studies. ¼: Currently available preoperative planning software programs employ different techniques to generate 3-dimensional models and produce anatomic measurements potentially affecting clinical decisions. ¼: There are no published data, to our knowledge, on the effect of preoperative computer planning and patient-specific instrumentation on long-term clinical outcomes.

Temporal and Geographic Trends in Medicare Reimbursement of Primary and Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty: 2000 to 2020.

INTRODUCTION: A comprehensive understanding of the trends for financial reimbursement of shoulder arthroplasty is important as progress is made toward achieving sustainable payment models in orthopaedics. This study analyzes Medicare reimbursement trends for shoulder arthroplasty. We hypothesize that Medicare reimbursement has decreased for shoulder arthroplasty procedures from 2000 to 2020 and that revision procedures have experienced greater decreases in reimbursement. METHODS: The Physician Fee Schedule Look-Up Tool from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services was queried for each Current Procedural Terminology code used in shoulder arthroplasty, and physician reimbursement data were extracted. All monetary data were adjusted for inflation to 2020 US dollars. Both the average annual and the total percentage change in surgeon reimbursement were calculated based on these adjusted trends for all included procedures. Mean percentage change in adjusted reimbursement among primary procedures in comparison to revision procedures was calculated. The mean reimbursement was assessed and visually represented by geographic state. RESULTS: The average reimbursement for all shoulder arthroplasty procedures decreased by 35.5% from 2000 to 2020. Revision total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) experienced the greatest mean decrease (-44.6%), whereas primary TSA (-23.9%) experienced the smallest mean decrease. The adjusted reimbursement rate for all included procedures decreased by an average of 1.8% each year. The mean reimbursement for revision procedures decreased more than the mean reimbursement for primary procedures (-41.1% for revision, -29.9% for primary; P < 0.001). The mean reimbursement for TSA in 2020, and the percent change in reimbursement from 2000 to 2020, varied by state. DISCUSSION: Medicare reimbursement for shoulder arthroplasty procedures has decreased from 2000 to 2020, with revision procedures experiencing the greatest decrease. Increased awareness and consideration of these trends will be important as healthcare reform evolves, and reimbursements for large joint arthroplasty are routinely adjusted.