Functional Return-to-Sport Testing Demonstrates Inconsistency in Predicting Short-Term Outcomes Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the relationship between functional testing at the time of return to sport (RTS) and short-term outcomes, such as second anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear and return to a preinjury level of sport, among athletes who underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science to identify studies examining athletes who underwent functional RTS testing and were followed for at least 12 months following ACLR. Studies were screened by 2 reviewers. A standardized template was used to extract information regarding study characteristics, ACLR information, functional test results, and risk factors associated with retear or reduced RTS. RESULTS: Of the 937 studies identified, 22 met the inclusion criteria. The average time between ACLR and RTS testing was 8.5 months. Single leg hop for distance performance had no association with retear risk in any study and no association with RTS rates in most studies. Quadriceps strength had conflicting results in relation to retear risk, whereas it had no relationship with RTS rates. Rates of reinjury and RTS were similar between patients who passed and did not pass combined hop and strength batteries. Asymmetric knee extension and hip moments, along with increased knee valgus and knee flexion angles, demonstrated increased risk of retear. CONCLUSIONS: Individual hop and strength tests that are often used in RTS protocols following ACLR may have limited and inconsistent value in predicting ACL reinjury and reduced RTS when used in isolation. Combined hop and strength test batteries also demonstrate low sensitivity and negative predictive value, highlighting conflicting evidence to suggest RTS testing algorithm superiority. Biomechanical assessment is promising for stratifying ACL reinjury risk, but further research is necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analysis Demonstrates Improved Reliability in Measuring Shoulder Glenoid Bone Loss Using a Two-Thirds Glenoid Height Technique Compared to the "Best-fit Circle".

PURPOSE: To evaluate the superior to inferior glenoid height as a reliable reference in best-fit circle creation for glenoid anatomy. METHODS: The morphology of the native glenoid was evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients without shoulder instability. Using T1 sagittal MRI images, 2 reviewers independently estimated glenoid size using the two-thirds technique and the "best-fit circle" technique at 2 different times. A Student t-test was used to determine significant difference between the two methodologies. Inter- and intra-rater reliability were calculated using interclass and intraclass coefficients. RESULTS: This study included 112 patients. Using the results of glenoid height and "best-fit circle" diameter, the diameter of the "best-fit circle" was found to intersect the glenoid line at 67.8% of the glenoid height on average. We found no significant difference between the 2 measures of glenoid diameter (27.6 vs 27.9, P = .456). The interclass and intraclass coefficients for the two-third method were 0.85 and 0.88, respectively. The interclass and intraclass coefficients for the perfect circle methods were 0.84 and 0.73, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We determined that the diameter of a circle placed on the inferior glenoid using the "best-fit circle" technique corresponds to 67.8% of the glenoid height. Additionally, we found that constructing a perfect circle using a diameter equal to two-thirds the height of the glenoid may improve intraclass reliability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective cohort study.

The Impact of Three-Dimensional Humeral Planning and Standard Transfer Instrumentation on Reconstruction of Native Humeral Anatomy for Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative three-dimensional CT-based planning for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has grown in popularity in the past decade with the primary focus on the glenoid. Little research has evaluated if humeral planning has any effect on the surgical execution of the humeral cut or the positioning of the prosthesis. METHODS: Three surgeons performed a prospective study utilizing 3D-printed humeri printed from CTs of existing patients, which were chosen to be -3, -1, 0, 1 and 3 standard deviations of all patients in a large database. A novel 3D printing process was utilized to 3D print not only the humerus, but also all four rotator cuff tendons. For each surgical procedure, the printed humerus was mounted inside a silicon shoulder, with printed musculature and skin, and with tensions similar to human tissue requiring standard retraction and instruments to expose the humerus. Three phases of the study were designed: Phase 1: Humeral neck cuts were performed on all specimens without any preoperative humeral planning, Phase 2: 3D planning was performed, and the cuts and implant selection were repeated, Phase 3: A neck shaft angle guide and digital calipers were used to measure humeral osteotomy thickness to aid in the desired humeral cut. All humeri were digitized. The difference between the prosthetic center of rotation (COR) and ideal COR was calculated. The percentage of patients with a varus neck shaft angle (NSA) was calculated for each phase. The difference in planned and actual cut thickness was also compared. RESULTS: For both 3D change in COR and medial to lateral change in COR, use of preoperative planning alone and with standard transfer instrumentation resulted in a significantly more anatomic restoration of ideal COR. The deviations from planned cut thickness decreased with each phase: Phase 1: 2.6±1.9 mm, Phase 2: 2.0±1.3 mm, Phase 3: 1.4±0.9 mm (p = 0.041 for Phase 3 vs Phase 1). For NSA, in Phase 1: 7/15 (47%) cases were in varus, in Phase 2: 5/15 (33%) were in varus and Phase 3: 1/15 (7%) were in varus (p =0.013 for Phase 3 vs Phase 1). CONCLUSIONS: Use of preoperative 3-D humeral planning for stemless anatomic TSA improved prosthetic humeral center of rotation, whether performed with or without standard transfer instrumentation. The use of a neck-shaft angle cut guide and calipers to measure cut thickness significantly reduced the percentage of varus humeral cuts and deviation from planned cut thickness.

Regional Variation from 2013 to 2021 in Primary Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Utilization, Reimbursement, and Patient Populations.

BACKGROUND: Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), encompassing both anatomical and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, has increased in popularity worldwide. The purpose of this study was to assess how TSA utilization, reimbursement, surgeon practices, and patient populations have evolved within the Medicare population from 2013 to 2021 at a national and regional level. METHODS: The Medicare Physician and Other Practitioners dataset was queried for all episodes of primary TSA (CPT-23472), both anatomic and reverse, between years 2013 and 2021. TSA utilization was assessed as volume per 10,000 Medicare beneficiaries. Average inflation-adjusted reimbursement, physician practice styles, and patient demographics of each TSA surgeon were extracted each year. Data was stratified geographically based on US census classifications and rural-urban commuting codes. Kruskal-Wallis and multivariate regressions were utilized to determine differences between regions. RESULTS: Between 2013 and 2021, TSA utilization increased by 121.8% nationally. The increase was greatest in the Northeast (+147.2%) and least in the Midwest (+115.5%). Average TSA reimbursement declined by 8.8% nationally, with the least decline in the Northeast (6.4%) and the greatest decline in the Midwest (-11.9%). In 2021, the Midwest had the highest TSA utilization (18.1/10,000), while having the lowest average reimbursement ($1,108.59; p<0.001). The Northeast had the lowest utilization (11.5/10,000) and highest reimbursement ($1,223.44; p<0.001) in 2021. Nationally, the number of Medicare beneficiaries per surgeon performing shoulder arthroplasty declined by 5.9%, while the average number of TSAs per surgeon (+8.5%) and average number of billable services per beneficiary (+16.6%) both increased. Surgeons in the South performed the most services per beneficiary in 2021 (9.0; p<0.001). The average comorbidity burden of patients decreased by 4.8% between 2013 and 2021, with the West having the healthiest patients in 2021. Higher patient comorbidities were associated with lower physician reimbursement nationally (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that TSA utilization in the Medicare population has more than doubled between 2013 and 2021, while average inflation-adjusted reimbursement has declined by nearly 10%. The Midwest has the highest per-capita TSA utilization, while simultaneously having the lowest average reimbursement per TSA. Over time, TSA surgeons are seeing fewer and healthier beneficiaries but performing more services per beneficiary. Additionally, increased patient complexity may be associated with lower reimbursement. Together, these findings are concerning for long-term equitable access to care within shoulder surgery.

Editorial Commentary: Revision Arthroscopic Bankart Is Not Recommended: The Sad Country Song We Just Can't Quit.

The approach to revision after an arthroscopic Bankart is a controversial topic. Several studies have shown an increased failure after revision compared with primary procedures, and many papers have recommended an open approach with or without bone augmentation. It seems intuitive that if an approach fails, that we ought to try a different one. And yet we do not. When facing this condition, it is far more common that we talk ourselves into performing another arthroscopic Bankart. It's relatively easy, familiar, and comforting. We find a reason to give this operation one more chance due to some patient-specific factor, like bone loss, number of anchors, or contact athlete status. Recent research shows that none of these factors matter, yet many of us find something that leads us to conclude that in our hands, with this patient, this time, the surgery will work. As data continue to emerge, the indications for this approach continue to narrow. It is becoming increasingly difficult to find a reason to go back to this operation as our best choice for the failed arthroscopic Bankart.

Treatment Following a First-Time Shoulder Dislocation: What Should I Do?

A first-time shoulder dislocation is a challenging topic that requires consideration of anatomic and patient-specific factors. Initial management is predicated on determining functional demands, activity level, and expectations of the patient, in addition to assessing the risk of recurrent instability. When considering surgical indications, it is imperative to understand the biomechanical implications of injury to the glenohumeral joint complex and how specific surgical procedures can restore stability. It is important to provide an overview of the current treatment algorithm for management of first-time shoulder dislocation, with a special focus on diagnosis and intervention in the young athlete.

Survival of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions in active-duty military populations.

PURPOSE: Anterior cruciate ligament tears and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) are common in young athletes. The modifiable and non-modifiable factors contributing to ACLR failure and reoperation are incompletely understood. The purpose of this study was to determine ACLR failure rates in a physically high-demand population and identify the patient-specific risk factors, including prolonged time between diagnosis and surgical correction, that portend failure. METHODS: A consecutive series of military service members with ACLR with and without concomitant procedures (meniscus [M] and/or cartilage [C]) done at military facilities between 2008 and 2011 was completed via the Military Health System Data Repository. This was a consecutive series of patients without a history of knee surgery for two years prior to the primary ACLR. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were estimated and evaluated with Wilcoxon test. Cox proportional hazard models calculated hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) to identify demographic and surgical factors that influenced ACLR failure. RESULTS: Of the 2735 primary ACLRs included in the study, 484/2,735 (18%) experienced ACLR failure within four years, including (261/2,735) (10%) undergoing revision ACLR and (224/2,735) (8%) due to medical separation. The factors that increased failure include Army Service (HR 2.19, 95% CI 1.67, 2.87), > 180 days from injury to ACLR (HR 1.550, 95% CI 1.157, 2.076), tobacco use (HR 1.429 95% CI 1.174, 1.738), and younger patient age (HR 1.024, 95% CI 1.004, 1.044). CONCLUSION: The overall clinical failure rate of service members with ACLR is 17.7% with minimum four-year follow-up, where more patients are likely to fail due to revision surgery than medical separation. The cumulative probability of survival at 4 years was 78.5%. Smoking cessation and treating ACLR patients promptly are modifiable risk factors impacting either graft failure or medical separation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

The long head of the biceps tendon: a valuable tool in shoulder surgery.

ANATOMY AND FUNCTION: The long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) has different properties and characteristics that render it a valuable tool in the hands of shoulder surgeons. Its accessibility, biomechanical strength, regenerative capabilities, and biocompatibility allow it to be a valuable autologous graft for repairing and augmenting ligamentous and muscular structures in the glenohumeral joint. SHOULDER SURGERY APPLICATIONS: Numerous applications of the LHBT have been described in the shoulder surgery literature, including augmentation of posterior-superior rotator cuff repair, augmentation of subscapularis peel repair, dynamic anterior stabilization, anterior capsule reconstruction, post-stroke stabilization, and superior capsular reconstruction. Some of these applications have been described meticulously in technical notes and case reports, whereas others may require additional research to confirm clinical benefit and efficacy. CONCLUSION: This review examines the role of the LHBT as a source of local autograft, with biological and biomechanical properties, in aiding outcomes of complex primary and revision shoulder surgery procedures.

Getting paid less for more: shoulder arthroplasty incidence and reimbursement within Medicare from 2000 to 2019.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder arthroplasty has grown in popularity in the past 2 decades, especially following US Food and Drug Administration approval of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in 2003. Studies have shown that Medicare reimbursement for a variety of orthopedic procedures has decreased significantly over the past 2 decades. No study has evaluated this trend in the setting of shoulder arthroplasty, however. The purpose of this study was to assess true reimbursement trends in primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty since 2000. METHODS: Information was collected from the publicly available Medicare Part B National Summary Data Files for the period of 2000 to 2019. Data from Current Procedural Terminology codes 23470 (shoulder hemiarthroplasty), 23472 (TSA), 23473 (single-component revision shoulder arthroplasty), and 23474 (both-component revision shoulder arthroplasty) were analyzed. Reimbursement amounts were adjusted for inflation to May 2021 dollars. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2019, the number of shoulder hemiarthroplasty procedures billed to Medicare decreased 70% (from 5847 to 1750) whereas the number of TSA procedures increased 1527% (from 4044 to 65,477). During the same period, per-procedure Medicare reimbursement for hemiarthroplasty decreased 35% (from $1545.71 to $1003.43) after adjustment for inflation to 2021 dollars. Similarly, TSA reimbursement decreased 22% (from $1600.98 to $1248.76) after adjustment for inflation. For revision procedures, the number of single- and both-component revisions billed to Medicare increased 381% (from 344 to 1655) and 1331% (from 220 to 3147), respectively. Adjusted reimbursement per procedure decreased 36% (from $1931.62 to $1244.49) and 37% (from $2293.08 to $1449.43), respectively. CONCLUSION: This study shows an increase in the annual volume of primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty procedures from 2000 to 2019. During the same period (2000-2019), true Medicare reimbursement to physicians for TSA decreased when adjusted for inflation. This study provides data that may be useful for surgeons, hospitals, and policy makers to maintain access to quality shoulder arthroplasty care moving forward.

Recurrent Instability and Surgery Are Common After Nonoperative Treatment of Posterior Glenohumeral Instability in NCAA Division I FBS Football Players.

BACKGROUND: In-season return to play after anterior glenohumeral instability is associated with high rates of recurrent instability and the need for surgical stabilization. We are not aware of previous studies that have investigated in-season return to play after posterior glenohumeral instability; furthermore, as posterior shoulder instability in collision athletes occurs frequently, understanding the expected outcome of in-season athletes may improve the ability of physicians to provide athletes with a better understanding of the expected outcome of their injury and their ability to return to sport. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What proportion of athletes returned to play during the season after posterior instability in collegiate football players? (2) How much time did athletes lose to injury, what proportion of athletes opted to undergo surgery, and what proportion of athletes experienced recurrent instability after a posterior instability episode during a collegiate football season? METHODS: A multicenter, prospective, observational study of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division 1 Football Bowl Subdivision athletes was performed at three US Military Service Academies. Ten athletes who sustained a posterior instability event during the regular football season and who pursued a course of nonoperative treatment were identified and prospectively observed through the subsequent season. All athletes in the observed cohort attempted an initial course of nonoperative treatment during the season. All athletes sustained subluxation events initially identified through history and physical examination at the time of injury. None of the athletes sustained a dislocation event requiring a manual reduction. Intraarticular pathology consisting of posterior labral pathology was further subsequently identified in all subjects via MRI arthrogram. Return to play was the primary outcome of interest. Time lost to injury, surgical intervention, and subsequent instability were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 10 athletes who opted for a trial of initial nonoperative management, seven athletes were able to return to play during the same season. Although these seven athletes returned within 1 week of their injury (median of 1 day), 5 of 7 athletes sustained recurrent subluxation events with a median (range) of four subluxation events per athlete (0 to 8) during the remainder of the season. Seven athletes were treated surgically after the completion of their season, four of whom returned to football. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that although collegiate football players are able to return to in-season sport after a posterior glenohumeral instability event, they will likely sustain multiple recurrent instability events and undergo surgery after the season is completed. The results of this study can help guide in-season management of posterior shoulder instability by allowing more appropriate postinjury counseling and decision making through the identification of those athletes who may require additional attention from medical staff during the season and possible modifications to training regimens to minimize long-term disability. Further prospective studies involving a larger cohort over several seasons should be performed through collaborative studies across the NCAA that better assess function and injury risk factors before beginning collegiate athletics. This would better characterize the natural history and associated functional limitations that athletes may encounter during their collegiate careers. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, prognostic study.

Nonoperative and Operative Soft-Tissue, Cartilage, and Bony Regeneration and Orthopaedic Biologics of the Shoulder: An Orthoregeneration Network (ON) Foundation Review.

Orthoregeneration is defined as a solution for orthopaedic conditions that harnesses the benefits of biology to improve healing, reduce pain, improve function, and optimally, provide an environment for tissue regeneration. Options include drugs, surgical intervention, scaffolds, biologics as a product of cells, and physical and electro-magnetic stimuli. The goal of regenerative medicine is to enhance the healing of tissue after musculoskeletal injuries as both isolated treatment and adjunct to surgical management, using novel therapies to improve recovery and outcomes. Various orthopaedic biologics (orthobiologics) have been investigated for the treatment of pathology involving the shoulder including the rotator cuff tendons, glenohumeral articular cartilage, glenoid labrum, the joint capsule, and bone. Promising and established treatment modalities include hyaluronic acid (HA); platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet rich concentrates (PRC); bone marrow aspirate (BMA) comprising mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs alternatively termed medicinal signaling cells and frequently, misleadingly labelled "mesenchymal stem cells"); MSC harvested from adipose, umbilical, or placental sources; factors including vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (FGF), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), transforming growth factor-beta (TGFß), bone morphogenic protein (BMP), and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs); prolotherapy; pulsed electromagnetic field therapy; microfracture and other marrow-stimulation techniques; biologic resurfacing using acellular dermal allografts, allograft Achilles tendons, allograft lateral menisci, fascia lata autografts, and porcine xenografts; osteochondral autograft or allograft); and autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI). Studies involving hyaluronic acid, platelet rich plasma, and medicinal signaling cells of various origin tissues have shown mixed results to-date as isolated treatments and as surgical adjuncts. Despite varied results thus far, there is great potential for improved efficacy with refinement of current techniques and translation of burgeoning preclinical work. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.

Complications Following Biologic Therapeutic Injections: A Multicenter Case Series.

PURPOSE: To describe the complications that occur following biologic therapeutic injections. METHODS: We queried physician members of the Biologic Association, a multidisciplinary organization dedicated to providing a unified voice for all matters related to musculoskeletal biologics and regenerative medicine. Patients included in this study must have (1) received a biologic injection, (2) sustained an adverse reaction, and (3) had a minimum of 1-year follow-up after the injection. Patient demographic information, medical comorbidities, diagnoses, and previous treatments were recorded. The type of injection, injection setting, injection manufacturers, and specific details about the complication and outcome were collected. RESULTS: In total, 14 patients were identified across 6 institutions in the United States (mean age 63 years, range: 36-83 years). The most common injections in this series were intra-articular knee injections (50%), followed intra-articular shoulder injections (21.4%). The most common underlying diagnosis was osteoarthritis (78.5%). Types of injections included umbilical cord blood, platelet-rich plasma, bone marrow aspirate concentrate, placental tissue, and unspecified "stem cell" injections. Complications included infection (50%), suspected sterile inflammatory response (42.9%), and a combination of both (7.1%). The most common pathogen identified from infection cases was Escherichia coli (n = 4). All patients who had isolated infections underwent treatment with at least one subsequent surgical intervention (mean: 3.6, range: 1-12) and intravenous antibiotic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that serious complications can occur following treatment with biologic injections, including infections requiring multiple surgical procedures and inflammatory reactions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

Technical Pearls for Shoulder Instability.

Glenohumeral instability is one of the most common conditions of the upper extremity, especially in athletes and active individuals. Over the past two decades, there has been a transformation of surgical treatment from traditionally open repair/reconstruction to arthroscopic management. This has especially been true with management of both anterior and posterior instability without significant bone loss. In this setting, and in certain patient populations (eg, contact/collision athletes), arthroscopic treatment may not be sufficient. Therefore, open techniques, such as coracoid bone transfer, also occupy an important role in management of glenohumeral instability. The goal of this review is to provide technical "pearls" in management of glenohumeral instability. Specifically, the review will highlight treatments such as arthroscopic anterior and posterior instability repair, posterior glenoid bone augmentation, and open coracoid transfer (Latarjet) for anterior instability with bone loss. We will also review management of complications related to coracoid transfer.

Management of Shoulder Instability in 2020: What, When, and How.

Anterior glenohumeral instability remains a common clinical problem in the athletic and working patient populations, and further, recurrence rates following stabilization surgery continue to be problematic. Over the past 5 years, there have been substantial improvements in the understanding of anterior shoulder instability. To better counsel and treat patients, it is imperative for surgeons to have a comprehensive understanding of the epidemiology of shoulder instability, the anatomy of the glenohumeral joint particularly as it relates to glenoid and humeral head bone loss, surgical indications, and surgical techniques. These critical topics are summarized in an effort to provide a complete guide to managing anterior shoulder instability in 2020.

Liposomal bupivacaine interscalene nerve block in shoulder arthroplasty is not superior to plain bupivacaine: a double-blinded prospective randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Interscalene brachial plexus blocks are a common modality used to provide adjunctive pain relief with shoulder replacement surgery. In 2018, the Federal Drug Administration approved the use of liposomal bupivacaine (LB) for such nerve blocks. We sought to evaluate whether this formulation of bupivacaine would provide superior pain relief for shoulder replacement patients over standard bupivacaine alone. Our hypotheses were that in the LB cohort the average postoperative pain score over the first 72 hours would be significantly lower, time to block cessation would be longer, total opioid consumption would be lower, and the average patient satisfaction score regarding their pain management would be higher. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized, double-blinded study was designed comparing primary shoulder replacement surgery after an interscalene block with 25 mL of 0.5% plain bupivacaine vs. 133 mg of LB with 7.5 mL of 0.5% and 7.5 mL of 0.25% plain bupivacaine. A total of 104 patients were included in the study, with an equal number in each study arm. Patients' visual analog pain scores (VAPS) were followed for their inpatient stay, first 3 full outpatient days, and at a 3-week follow-up. Use of opioid medication was recorded for the same intervals and converted to morphine milligram equivalents. The time to first opioid rescue was documented, as well as the patients' satisfaction with their pain management at both the 3-day and 3-week intervals. RESULTS: No clinically relevant advantage to the use of LB over plain bupivacaine was found. During the second postoperative day, the mean VAPS was 2.4 with LB vs. 3.3 in the standard cohort (P = .0409). The only other statistically significant finding was a higher VAPS with LB during the third full day home compared with standard bupivacaine (4.0 vs. 2.8, respectively, P = .0197). Both of these differences were less than the minimal clinically important difference of 2 for the VAPS. Analysis of the VAPS for the first and third postoperative days, the first and second full days home, and at 3 weeks revealed no significant difference. Similarly, there was no significant difference in time to first opioid rescue, total morphine milligram equivalent use, and patient satisfaction with pain management. CONCLUSION: When used for an interscalene block to provide adjunctive pain relief in shoulder replacement surgery, the addition of LB to plain bupivacaine provides no additional clinically important benefit to the patient's pain experience over standard bupivacaine.

Scapular motion in the presence of rotator cuff tears: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff tears (RCTs) remain a significant source of pain and disability in the shoulder. Although much work has been done in the study of the effects of rotator cuff tears on glenohumeral joint motion, much less has been done in understanding the effect of rotator cuff tearing on scapular motion or activation. It remains unknown whether scapular dyskinesis is causative or adaptive. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature to determine the relationship between rotator cuff tear presence and size on scapular motion, and if rotator cuff repair restored normal motion. METHODS: A systematic review using PRISMA guidelines was accomplished to include all studies with biomechanical or clinical outcomes of scapular motion in the presence of RCTs. Studies were excluded if they involved shoulder arthroplasty, rotator cuff tendinopathy, or shoulder impingement without an RCT. From 530 initial references, 42 manuscripts were selected for full review and cross referenced. All studies were evaluated for inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS: Sixteen studies including 335 rotator cuff tears were included in the final review. There were several findings of interest in the literature. First, although all studies demonstrated scapular dyskinesis, they did not report a consistent pattern of motion in the presence of an RCT. In general, scapular posterior tilt was decreased, and scapular upward rotation was increased, especially in large tears, but the literature was unclear as to whether this was a result of the RCT or an adaptive attempt to maintain elevation. Larger RCTs resulted in more pronounced scapular dysfunction, but there was significant variability within studies. Further, dyskinesis was confounded by pain with more abnormal movement in symptomatic vs. asymptomatic RCTs, the latter of which were not different from normal healthy controls. Four studies addressed the effect of RCT on scapular mechanics and found that repair consistently improved it compared to the normal side, but the time to normalization varied between 5 months and 2 years. CONCLUSION: Scapular motion is abnormal in the presence of an RCT, but the literature is inconsistent regarding a universally affected variable or consistent degree of scapular dysfunction in this setting. Furthermore, it remains unknown which changes are adaptive vs. pathologic. Understanding the relationship between rotator cuff tearing and scapular dyskinesis will require better biomechanical models that consider scapular dyskinesis in their design.

Athletes diagnosed with anterior and posterior shoulder instability display different chief complaints and disability.

BACKGROUND: Anterior shoulder instability is a common complaint of young athletes. Posterior instability in this population is less well understood, and the standard of care has not been defined. The purpose of the study is to compare index frequency, treatment choice, and athlete disability following an incident of anterior or posterior shoulder instability in high school and collegiate athletes. METHODS: A total of 58 high school and collegiate athletes (n=30 athletes with anterior instability; n=28 athletes with posterior instability) were included. Athletes suffering from a traumatic sport-related shoulder instability episode during a team-sponsored practice or game were identified by their school athletic trainer. Athletes were referred to the sports medicine physician or orthopedic surgeon for diagnosis and initial treatment choice (operative vs. nonoperative). Athletes diagnosed with traumatic anterior or posterior instability who completed the full course of treatment and provided pre- and post-treatment patient-reported outcome measures were included in the study. The frequency of shoulder instability was compared by direction, mechanism of injury (MOI), and treatment choice through χ2 analyses. A repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare the functional outcomes by treatment type and direction of instability (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Athletes diagnosed with anterior instability were more likely to report a chief complaint of instability (70%), whereas those diagnosed with posterior instability reported a primary complaint of pain interfering with function (96%) (P = .001). The primary MOI classified as a contact event was similar between anterior and posterior instability groups (77% vs. 54%, P = .06) as well as the decision to proceed with surgery (60% vs. 72%, P = .31). In patients with nonoperative care, athletes with anterior instability had significantly more initial disability than those with posterior instability (32±6.1 vs. 58±8.1, P = .001). Pre- and post-treatment Penn Shoulder Scores for athletes treated with early surgery were similar (P > .05). There were no differences in functional outcomes at discharge in those treated nonoperatively regardless of direction of instability (P = .24); however, change in Penn score was significantly greater in those with anterior (61±18.7) than those with posterior (27 ± 25.2) instability (P = .002). CONCLUSION: Athletes with anterior instability appear to have different mechanisms and complaints than those with posterior instability. Among those that receive nonoperative treatment, athletes with anterior instability have significantly greater initial disability and change in disability than those with posterior disability during course of care.

Regenesorb and polylactic acid hydroxyapatite anchors are associated with similar osseous integration and rotator cuff healing at 2 years.

BACKGROUND: Commercially available suture anchors for rotator cuff repairs can differ significantly in architecture and material. Clinical data on their osseous integration and its effect on patient-reported outcomes is scarce. Preclinical investigations indicated a higher rate of osseous integration for the open-architecture design of the Healicoil Regenesorb anchor than the closed-threaded design of the Twinfix (Smith & Nephew). The purpose of this study was to investigate these 2 anchors with different architecture and material to determine their effect on osseous integration and clinical outcomes after rotator cuff repair. METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed from 2014 to 2019. Sixty-four patients (39 females, 25 males) with an average age of 58.7 years who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair by one of 4 board-certified, fellowship-trained surgeons were randomized to receive Healicoil Regenesorb (PLGA/ß-TCP/Calcium Sulfate) or Twinfix Ultra HA (PLLA/HA) anchors. Thirty-two patients had Healicoil anchors implanted, and 32 patients had Twinfix anchors implanted. Of the 64 patients, 51 returned at 24 months for computed tomographic (CT) examination (25 Twinfix and 26 Healicoil) to determine osteointegration of the anchors. Patient-reported outcomes, including Penn Shoulder Score (PENN), Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index, visual analog scale, EQ-5D, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Global Rating of Change, were collected at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months. Ultrasonography was used to assess rotator cuff integrity after 6 months. Two board-certified, fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons, blinded to the type of anchors, analyzed the CT scans to assess the anchor osteointegration at 24 months using a previously published grading scale. RESULTS: There were no differences in demographics, preoperative outcomes, or baseline characteristics such as tear size, number of anchors, Goutallier classification, or smoking status between groups. There was no difference in osseous integration between the 2 anchors at 24 months (P = .117). Eight patients had rotator cuff retears, of which 2 patients had Twinfix anchors and 6 patients had Healicoil anchors (P = .18). There were no statistically significant differences in patient-reported outcomes or complications between groups. The 2-year PENN scores were 89 with the Twinfix and 88 with Healicoil anchors (P = .55). CONCLUSION: Despite differences in material and anchor architecture, the rate of healing and patient-reported outcomes were similar between the Twinfix and Healicoil anchor groups. The rate of osteointegration was the same at 2 years.

Consensus statement on the treatment of massive irreparable rotator cuff tears: a Delphi approach by the Neer Circle of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Management of massive irreparable rotator cuff tears (MIRCTs) remains controversial owing to variability in patient features and outcomes contributing to a lack of unanimity in treatment recommendations. The purpose of this study was to implement the Delphi process using experts from the Neer Circle of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons to determine areas of consensus regarding treatment options for a variety of MIRCTs. METHODS: A panel of 120 shoulder surgeons were sent a survey regarding MIRCT treatments including arthroscopic débridement and partial cuff repair, graft augmentation, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), superior capsular reconstruction (SCR), and tendon transfer. An iterative Delphi process was then conducted with a first-round questionnaire consisting of 13 patient factors with the option for open-ended responses to identify important features influencing the treatment of MIRCTs. The second-round survey sought to determine the importance of patient factors related to the 6 included treatment options. A third-round survey asked participants to classify treatment options for 60 MIRCT patient scenarios as either preferred treatment, acceptable treatment, not acceptable/contraindicated, or unsure/no opinion. Patient scenarios were declared to achieve consensus for the preferred and not acceptable/contraindicated categories when at least 80% of the survey respondents agreed on a response, and a 90% threshold was required for the acceptable treatment category, defined by an acceptable treatment or preferred treatment response. RESULTS: Seventy-two members agreed to participate and were deemed to have the requisite expertise to contribute based on their survey responses regarding clinical practice and patient volume. There were 20 clinical scenarios that reached 90% consensus as an acceptable treatment, with RSA selected for 18 scenarios and arthroscopic débridement and/or partial repair selected for 2. RSA was selected as the singular preferred treatment option in 8 scenarios. Not acceptable/contraindicated treatment options reached consensus in 8 scenarios, of which, 4 related to SCR, 3 related to RSA, and 1 related to partial repair with graft augmentation. CONCLUSION: This Delphi process exhibited significant consensus regarding RSA as a preferred treatment strategy in older patients with pseudoparesis, an irreparable subscapularis, and dynamic instability. In addition, the process identified certain unacceptable treatments for MIRCTs such as SCR in older patients with pseudoparesis and an irreparable subscapularis or RSA in young patients with an intact or reparable subscapularis without pseudoparesis or dynamic instability. The publication of these scenarios and areas of consensus may serve as a useful guide for practitioners in the management of MIRCTs.

Editorial Commentary: Resilience and Knee Arthroscopy: Are We Missing the Most Important Patient-Reported Outcome?

Resilience is a psychological factor that has been shown to affect outcomes after stressful events. Recent work has detected a correlation between patient resilience and surgical outcome. Issues of postoperative pain response, patient-reported outcomes, and ultimate outcomes may all be affected by resilience, and thus research into these relationships and how to optimize psychologic fitness as part of a perioperative plan are of interest.