Virtual and Augmented Reality Simulators Show Intraoperative, Surgical Training, and Athletic Training Applications: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: To review published literature to identify and evaluate the effect of virtual reality (complete immersion) and augmented reality (overlay of digital information onto the physical world) simulators on intraoperative use for orthopaedic surgeons, orthopaedic surgical education, and athletic training. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify studies, published since 2014, that evaluated the role of augmented/virtual reality on intraoperative use for orthopaedic surgeons, orthopaedic surgical education, and athletic training. RESULTS: Virtual reality (VR) simulators provide 3-dimensional graphical simulation of the physical world, and augmented reality (AR) simulators overlay digital information onto the physical world. Simulators can include interactive features (i.e., replication of intraoperative bleeding), haptic feedback, and unrestricted task repetition, and they can record, compare, and analyze performance while being easily accessible and eliminating the need for the presence of a mentor or coach. Four studies reported on VR for intraoperative use, 47 studies on surgical education, and 10 studies on athletic training. Two studies revealed the advantages of using VR simulation during intraoperative procedures, specifically showcasing its benefits for elbow arthroscopy, while 2 studies demonstrated similar positive outcomes for hip arthroscopy. Seventeen studies demonstrated that a VR simulator could be a beneficial tool to assist in surgical education for the knee, while 12 studies found that VR simulation is a valuable tool for aiding in surgical education of shoulder arthroscopy. Ten studies demonstrated that VR simulation improves skills in the operating room. Three studies revealed that individuals with more experience exhibit superior performance on these simulators compared to those with less experience. In the realm of athletic training, 10 studies showcased the potential of VR simulation to play a significant role in athletic performance and injury rehabilitation. CONCLUSIONS: VR simulation shows benefits in the operating room, is a valuable tool for surgical education resulting in improved skills, and can be used to enhance athletic performance and injury rehabilitation. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Understanding that VR simulators can improve surgical outcomes, surgical skill training, and athletic training and rehabilitation could facilitate development and adoption of this advanced technology.

Rotator Cuff Repair With Patch Augmentation Is Associated With Lower Retear Rates for Large Tears: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing clinical outcomes of rotator cuff repair with and without patch augmentation. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify randomized controlled trials that directly compared outcomes between rotator cuff repair (RCR) with versus without patch augmentation. Patients were evaluated based on retear rate, histological outcomes, radiological outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (Constant score; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES] score; University of California-Los Angeles shoulder scale; Simple Shoulder Test; EuroQol-visual analog scale; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score; and PENN shoulder score questionnaire). RESULTS: Six studies (1 level I, 5 level II) met inclusion criteria, including 188 patients undergoing RCR alone (Control) and 193 patients undergoing RCR with patch augmentation (Patch). Patient age ranged from 56.0 to 68.0 years. The mean follow-up time ranged from 14.0 to 68.4 months. The average body mass index ranged from 24.4 to 29.4, and the overall percentage of males ranged from 32.5% to 82.3%. Three studies found significantly decreased retear rates with patch augmentation. The retear rate ranged from 34.0% to 65.4% in the Control group and 9.1% to 52.9% in the Patch group. One study found a significant difference for the Constant score favoring the Patch group. Two studies found a significant difference for the ASES score favoring the Patch group. One study found significantly better results with patch augmentation in terms of repaired tendon thickness and footprint coverage, based on magnetic resonance imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Patch augmentation of rotator cuff repairs may be associated with lower retear rates for large tears. There is limited evidence to suggest that patch augmentation is associated with improved patient-reported outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review of level I and II studies.

The Principles of Hip Joint Preservation.

The 3 primary factors involved with preservation of the hip joint are femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), hip dysplasia, and femoral torsion abnormalities. Each of these factors affects the health of the acetabular labrum and femoroacetabular cartilage. The appropriate surgical treatments for each of these factors include arthroscopic or open femoroplasty or acetabuloplasty for FAI, periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) for acetabular dysplasia, and de-rotational femoral osteotomy for femoral torsion abnormalities. When evaluating patients with prearthritic hip conditions, orthopaedic surgeons should be aware of the various factors involved in hip joint preservation and, if surgery is indicated, surgeons should be sure to address all factors that need surgical treatment rather than focusing on the most obvious issue or injury (e.g., a labral tear). The purpose of this infographic is to illustrate the importance of the factors involved in hip joint preservation and the appropriate treatments for pathology in any of these factors.

Microfracture of Acetabular Chondral Lesions Is Not Superior to Other Cartilage Repair Techniques in Patients With Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review to compare clinical outcomes of hip arthroscopy patients undergoing microfracture (MFx) versus other cartilage repair procedures for chondral lesions of the acetabulum. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify comparative studies that directly compared outcomes between MFx and other cartilage repair procedures for full-thickness chondral lesions of the acetabulum identified during hip arthroscopy. The search phrase used was: hip AND arthroscopy AND microfracture. Patients were evaluated based on reoperation rates and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: Six studies (all Level III evidence) met inclusion criteria, including a total of 202 patients undergoing microfracture (group A) and 327 patients undergoing another cartilage repair procedure (group B). Mean patient age ranged from 35.0 to 45.0 years. Mean follow-up time ranged from 12.0 to 72.0 months. Significantly better patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were found in patients undergoing treatment with bone marrow aspirate concentrate, microfragmented adipose tissue concentrate, autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis, and a combination of autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis and bone marrow aspirate concentrate compared with MFx. No studies found significantly better postoperative PROs in group A. The reoperation rate ranged from 0% to 34.6% in group A and 0% to 15.9% in group B. Three of 5 studies reporting on reoperation rate found a significantly greater reoperation rate in group A, with no difference in the other 2 studies. CONCLUSIONS: The literature on MFx of acetabular chondral lesions is limited and heterogeneous. Based on the available data, MFx alone results in a greater or equivalent reoperation rate and inferior or equivalent PROs compared with other cartilage repair procedures for acetabular chondral lesions in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of level III studies.

During Postless Hip Arthroscopy, Male Patients, High Body Mass Index, Low Beighton Scores, and Limited Range of Motion Require High Traction Force.

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of demographic and anatomic factors on traction force required during postless hip arthroscopy. METHODS: A prospectively collected database was retrospectively analyzed on patients undergoing hip arthroscopy by the senior author, including patient sex, age, body mass index (BMI), Beighton Hypermobility Score, hip range of motion in clinic and under anesthesia, hip dysplasia, acetabular version, and femoral version. All patients underwent postless hip arthroscopy under general anesthesia. At the initiation of hip arthroscopy, the traction force required to distract the hip joint was measured before and following interportal capsulotomy. Multiple regression analysis was performed to determine the effects of demographic and anatomic factors on measured distraction force. RESULTS: In total, 352 hips (114 male, 238 female) were included with a mean age of 32.6 years and a mean BMI of 24.1 kg/m2. Mean initial traction force was 109 lbs and decreased to 94.3 lbs following capsulotomy (P < .0001). The starting traction force was significantly greater in male patients (P < .001), patients with a lack of hypermobility (Beighton Hypermobility Score of 0-2) (P = .026), and in patients with lower abduction (P < .001), lower internal rotation (P = .002), and lower external rotation (P = .012) on multiple regression analysis. When performing a subanalysis divided by sex, male patients with elevated BMI required significantly greater starting traction force (P = .014). Lateral center edge angle, sourcil angle, and the presence of hip dysplasia did not demonstrate a significant correlation with traction force. CONCLUSIONS: Male patients, patients with reduced preoperative hip range of motion, patients with a lack of joint hypermobility, and male patients with an elevated BMI require greater initial traction force during postless hip arthroscopy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective case series.

The Windshield Wiper Sign Is an Instability-Related Osteochondral Defect of the Anterolateral Femoral Head.

PURPOSE: To investigate a radiographic sign believed to be indicative of hip instability and acetabular suction seal disruption in the native hip, coined the "windshield wiper" (WSW) sign. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed for patients who underwent periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) with the senior author between March 2021 and September 2023. A WSW sign was identified on plain films as a concave or flat osteochondral defect on the anterolateral femoral head extending medial to the head-neck junction with resultant loss of femoral head sphericity in the native hip. Every patient underwent a standardized series of radiographs, as well as computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. All patients underwent arthroscopy before PAO to address intra-articular pathology and other indicated procedures. The osteochondral defect and resultant suction seal disruption were verified during arthroscopy. These patients were then compared with a control group of arthroscopically treated hips without hip instability. RESULTS: Of 250 patients reviewed, a total of 19 hips in 17 patients (prevalence of 7.6%) demonstrated radiographic evidence of the WSW sign. All patients with a WSW sign presented with symptomatic clinical hip instability requiring a PAO. The mean patient age was 31.2 years, with a mean lateral center-edge angle (LCEA) of 14.3°. There were 13 hips (68.4%) with dysplasia, 4 (21.1%) with borderline dysplasia, and 2 (10.5%) with a normal LCEA. All patients with a WSW sign and LCEA ≥ 20° displayed significant femoral antetorsion abnormalities. All arthroscopic videos and images demonstrated a compromised suction seal. Of the 50 control group hips reviewed, the WSW sign was not identified. CONCLUSIONS: The WSW sign is an uncommon radiographic finding in patients with hip instability. When identified, it can be predictive of substantial instability, especially in cases which are otherwise considered borderline dysplasia or normal based on LCEA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative case control study.

Medial Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction With Allograft Provides Excellent Clinical Outcomes, High Rates of Return to Play, and a Low Incidence of Postoperative Complications: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review evaluating clinical outcomes in patients undergoing medial ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (MUCLR) with soft-tissue allograft. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The primary outcomes evaluated were patient-reported outcome scores, return to play (RTP) rates, incidence of postoperative complications, and rates of graft rupture or mechanical failure. RESULTS: The literature search identified 395 articles, and 5 studies met final inclusion criteria after full-text review. A total of 274 patients were analyzed in the included studies and follow-up ranged from 3.0 to 7.6 years. Two studies (number of patients = 141) reported outcomes exclusively of MUCLR with allograft, whereas 3 studies (number of patients = 133) reported outcomes in patients undergoing MUCLR with either allograft or autograft. Allograft sources included gracilis, semitendinosus, plantaris, peroneus longus, and palmaris longus. Level of patient athletic competition ranged from recreational athletes to the professional level; however, nonathletes in the setting of trauma were also included. The RTP rate after MUCLR with soft-tissue allograft was 95.3%, and 89.3% of patients returned to a similar or greater level of play postoperatively. The Timmerman-Andrews score was reported in 2 studies, and the means postoperatively ranged from 94.55 to 97. Postoperative complication rates were low (range, 0% to 20%), and there were no reported incidences of allograft rupture or mechanical failure. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the available data, soft-tissue allograft for MUCLR in athletic patient populations provides excellent clinical outcomes, high rates of RTP, and low rates of postoperative complications and graft failure at short-term follow-up. There remains a lack of high-quality evidence directly comparing autograft versus allograft outcomes in elite overhead-throwing athletes to support allograft as an acceptable alternative for MUCLR in this patient population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III-IV studies.

Insufficient Evidence for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Utilizing Suture Tape Augmentation: A Systematic Review of Clinical Outcomes at Minimum 1-Year Follow-up.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review of clinical studies to directly compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with versus without suture tape (ST) augmentation. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify comparative studies directly comparing outcomes of ACLR with versus without ST augmentation with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. The search terms used were anterior cruciate ligament suture tape. Patients were evaluated based on graft failure rates, return to sport (RTS), anteroposterior (AP) laxity, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). RESULTS: Five studies (all Level III) met inclusion criteria, including a total of 246 patients undergoing ACLR with ST augmentation (SA group) and 282 patients undergoing ACLR without augmentation (control group). Patient age ranged from 14.9 to 29.7 years. The mean follow-up time ranged from 24.0 to 48.6 months. The mean body mass index ranged from 25.3 to 26.3 kg/m2 and the overall percentage of males ranged from 43.4% to 69.0%. Overall, the graft failure rate ranged from 1.0% to 25.0% in the SA group and 8.0% to 20.0% in the control group. Among the studies that reported RTS rates, the rate ranged from 69.2% to 88.9% in the SA group and 51.5% to 87.5% in the control group. Among all PROs, 2 studies found a significant difference in the Tegner score favoring the SA group. Otherwise, no significant differences were found between groups in terms of PROs. No significant differences in AP laxity were found between groups within any particular study. There was heterogeneity between studies regarding surgical techniques, postoperative rehabilitation protocols, and reported PROs. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to suggest that patients undergoing ACLR with ST augmentation may experience favorable clinical outcomes compared with ACLR alone. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of Level III studies.

Patients Undergoing Postless Hip Arthroscopy Demonstrate Significantly Better Patient-Reported Outcomes and Clinically Significant Outcomes Compared to Conventional Post-Assisted Hip Arthroscopy at Short-Term Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the short-term clinical outcomes of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy with versus without the use of a perineal post. METHODS: A prospective, single-surgeon cohort study was performed on a subset of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between 2020 and 2022. A post-free hip distraction system was used at 1 center at which the senior author operates, and a perineal post was used at another surgical location. An electronic survey of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) was completed by each patient at a minimum of 1 year postoperatively. PROMs included a visual analog scale for pain; University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Activity Scale; modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS); Hip Outcome Score-Sports-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS); and a Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. Postoperative scores and clinically significant outcomes, including the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptom state, for each PROM were compared between groups. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were reached for follow-up (41 post, 28 postless) of 87 patients eligible for the study (79%). No significant differences were found between groups in terms of sex (post: 61% female, postless: 54% female, P = .54), age (post: 34 years, postless: 29 years, P = .11), body mass index (post: 26, postless: 24, P = .23), or follow-up duration (post: 24.4 months, postless: 21.3 months, P = .16). There was a significantly higher visual analog scale (3.1 vs 1.4, P = .01), a significantly lower UCLA Activity Scale score (7.0 vs 8.4, P = .02), and a significantly lower mHHS (73.7 vs 82.2, P = .03) in the post-assisted group. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the postless group achieved a patient acceptable symptom state for the UCLA (89.3% vs 68.3%, P = .04), mHHS (84.6% vs 61.0%, P = .04), and HOS-SSS (84.0% vs 61.0%, P = .048) and a substantial clinical benefit for HOS-SSS (72.0% vs 41.5%, P = .02). One patient (2.6%) in the post group underwent revision hip arthroscopy, and another was indicated for total hip arthroplasty by the time of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Postless hip arthroscopy may result in better clinical outcomes compared with post-assisted hip arthroscopy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Editorial Commentary: Most Patients With Borderline Hip Dysplasia Do Well After Hip Arthroscopy: Could Instability Be the Problem for Those Who Do Poorly?

Borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) is often defined based on the lateral center edge angle. While patients with frank hip dysplasia often require bony realignment with periacetabular osteotomy and/or derotational femoral osteotomy, patients with BHD represent an "in-between" group of patients. While many, perhaps even most, patients with BHD will have successful outcomes after hip arthroscopy alone, some will be unresponsive to an arthroscopic-only approach and require the same surgical treatments as those with frank dysplasia. A variety of radiographic and arthroscopic parameters can be used to assess the degree of instability in patients with BHD. It may be that patients with "borderline" hip dysplasia combined with hip instability are more likely to fail an arthroscopic-only approach but to date we still do not have a great algorithm for determining which patients with BHD should undergo bony treatment with periacetabular osteotomy. It is important for future studies to continue to seek out characteristics of BHD patients that predict failure of an arthroscopic-only approach. This will not only allow for optimal initial surgical treatment in "at-risk" patients with BHD but will also improve success rates in BHD patients selected for hip arthroscopy as initial surgical treatment.

Editorial Commentary: For Surgical Treatment of Elbow Lateral Epicondylitis, Arthroscopic Treatment Is Recommended for Surgeons With Elbow Arthroscopy Training.

Lateral epicondylitis is a commonly encountered and persistent problem in the active, middle-aged population, with a reported annual incidence as high as 3.4%. Lateral epicondylitis is often treated successfully with conservative measures but may necessitate surgical intervention in refractory cases. Most of the review literature has failed to definitively identify arthroscopic or open debridement as the superior surgical approach. We favor the arthroscopic approach because it allows for the examination and treatment of concomitant intra-articular pathologies, which may be underappreciated on magnetic resonance imaging, and for minimal disruption of the superficial extensors to access the pathologic structures. In addition, this approach often allows for a quick resolution of symptoms and expeditious return to work and sport with a low rate of complications or revisions. For surgeons who are not experienced in elbow arthroscopy, the option of open debridement remains a reasonable approach. However, our preferred management of surgically indicated tennis elbow is arthroscopic repair of the affected extensor tendons along with addressing any concomitant pathology, when present. In our opinion, this leads to optimized long-term outcomes.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Sports Medicine Patient Care.

The COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated new practices in sports medicine patient care. Telehealth has been validated as a reliable tool for consultations and physical examinations and increases access to care in a cost-efficient manner. Social distancing and avoiding team members who have tested positive are the most effective ways to reduce spread. For screening, daily self-reported symptom checklists and fever monitoring help identify potentially infected athletes who should be instructed to isolate and seek care. Polymerase chain-reaction (PCR) testing for the virus via nasopharyngeal swab is not recommended for screening and should be reserved for symptomatic individuals with fever, cough, or shortness of breath. Face masks and personal protective equipment (PPE) may be beneficial in high-risk settings, but there is little evidence to support use in athletic populations. Median return to play after COVID-19 in elite athletes has been reported as 18 days (range: 12 to 30), with 27% not fully available at 28 days. Chest pain at diagnosis was the only symptom associated with time loss longer than 28 days. Finally, canceled competitions or time loss results in grief, stress, and frustration for athletes, as well as loss of a social support network and routine training regimens. Mental health support services may be indicated.

The Principles of Knee Joint Preservation.

The 3 primary factors involved with preservation of the knee joint include joint alignment, meniscal status, and ligament stability (in particular that of the anterior cruciate ligament [ACL]). These factors are interdependent and result in knee joint homeostasis when all factors are stable. When a deficiency exists in one of the factors, it will affect the others. For example, the ACL and posterior horn of the medial meniscus both act as restraints to anterior tibial translation. Thus, medial meniscal deficiency increases the risk for failure of ACL reconstruction, and chronic ACL insufficiency increases the risk for medial meniscus tears. Furthermore, all 3 of the factors of joint preservation have an impact on the articular cartilage status of the knee joint. Studies have shown that cartilage-preservation procedures do not result in optimal outcomes if there is joint malalignment, meniscal deficiency, or ligament deficiency. When evaluating patients with knee cartilage pathology, surgeons should be aware of the various factors involved in knee joint preservation and, if surgery is indicated, all factors should be addressed in order to support a successful result.

Improved Pain and Perioperative Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy With the Pericapsular Nerve Group Block.

PURPOSE: To compare early postoperative pain in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy with versus without the pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of prospectively collected data was performed to identify patients who underwent hip arthroscopy at a single institution between May 2019 and October 2021. Patients were included if they received general anesthesia and were opioid naive. Patients who received the PENG block were compared with patients who did not. Opioid, benzodiazepine, and antiemetic medication administration was recorded both intraoperatively and for the duration of the patient's stay in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). Opioids administered were converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs). Pain was assessed with a visual analog scale. Time to discharge (in minutes) and complications were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients were identified for inclusion, of whom 28 received the PENG block and 25 did not. Opioid consumption was significantly lower in the PENG block group both intraoperatively (16.9 ± 14.1 MMEs vs 40.6 ± 18.3 MMEs, P < .001) and in the PACU (14.4 ± 11.4 MMEs vs 31.2 ± 20.1 MMEs, P < .001). The highest recorded PACU pain score was significantly greater in the no-PENG block group (7.0 ± 1.9 vs 5.3 ± 2.1, P = .004). Within the PENG block group, fewer patients required antiemetics (0 vs 4, P = .043). There was a greater time to discharge in the no-PENG block group (161 ± 50 minutes vs 129 ± 34 minutes, P = .008). No complications, including postoperative falls, were noted in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The PENG block improves perioperative outcomes by decreasing pain, opioid consumption, time to discharge, antiemetic requirements, and benzodiazepine requirements after hip arthroscopy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis Who Receive Platelet-Rich Plasma or Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate Injections Have Better Outcomes Than Patients Who Receive Hyaluronic Acid: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature to compare the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), and hyaluronic acid (HA) injections for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify Level I studies that compared the clinical efficacy of at least 2 of the following 3 injection therapies: PRP, BMAC, and HA for knee OA. The search phrase used was knee AND osteoarthritis AND randomized AND ("platelet rich plasma" OR "bone marrow aspirate" OR "hyaluronic acid"). Patients were primarily assessed based on patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies (all Level I) met inclusion criteria, including 1,042 patients undergoing intra-articular injection(s) with PRP (mean age 57.7 years, mean follow-up 13.5 months), 226 patients with BMAC (mean age 57.0 years, mean follow-up 17.5 months), and 1,128 patients with HA (mean age 59.0 years, mean follow-up 14.4 months). Nonnetwork meta-analyses demonstrated significantly better postinjection WOMAC (P < .001), VAS (P < .01), and Subjective IKDC scores (P < .001) in patients who received PRP compared with patients who received HA. Similarly, network meta-analyses demonstrated significantly better postinjection WOMAC (P < .001), VAS (P = .03), and Subjective IKDC (P < .001) scores in patients who received BMAC compared with patients who received HA. There were no significant differences in postinjection outcome scores when comparing PRP with BMAC. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing treatment for knee OA with PRP or BMAC can be expected to experience improved clinical outcomes when compared with patients who receive HA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, meta-analysis of Level I studies.

Screw Fixation for the Latarjet Procedure May Reduce Risk of Recurrent Instability but Increases Reoperation Rate Compared to Suture-Button Fixation: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review to compare clinical outcomes, complications, and reoperation rates of patients undergoing the Latarjet procedure with screw vs suture-button fixation. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify clinical studies directly comparing screw vs suture-button fixation for the Latarjet procedure. The search terms used were shoulder screw suture button. Patients were evaluated based on reoperation rate, complication rate, recurrent instability, radiologic outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes. Graft and screw position were assessed via computed tomography. RESULTS: Seven studies (1 Level II, 6 Level III) met inclusion criteria, with 845 patients undergoing the Latarjet procedure with screw fixation (screw group) and 279 patients with suture-button fixation (suture-button group). Mean patient age ranged from 21.2 to 29.6 years. Mean follow-up time ranged from 6.0 to 40.8 months. The recurrent instability rate ranged from 0% to 2.5% in the screw group and 0% to 8.3% in the suture-button group. The reoperation rate ranged from 0% to 7.7% in the screw group compared to 0% to 1.9% in the suture-button group. One study reported significantly lower visual analog scale pain scores in the suture-button group compared with the screw group (1.5 vs 1.2, P = .003). No other studies reported significant differences in any patient-reported outcomes. There was no significant difference in horizontal or vertical graft position, graft union rate, or complication rate between groups in any study. CONCLUSIONS: The Latarjet procedure with screw fixation may result in a lower risk of recurrent instability compared to suture-button fixation, although screw fixation may also have a higher reoperation rate due to hardware-related complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of Level II to III studies.

Editorial Commentary: Differences in Femoral Torsion Measurements Based on Axial Versus Axial-Oblique Magnetic Resonance Imaging Sequences-Let's Begin to Standardize Hip-Preservation Techniques to Improve Research and Clinical Outcomes.

Femoral torsion is an important measure in patients with femoroacetabular impingement presenting with limited hip range of motion. However, femoral torsion may be measured using computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging and on axial or axial-oblique sequences. Recent research shows that femoral torsion measurements differ based on the magnetic resonance imaging sequences on which this parameter is measured. In some cases, this may be clinically relevant in the sense that a derotational femoral osteotomy may be considered when otherwise it would not be. As more research is published within the specialized field of hip preservation surgery, we must begin to standardize our research and clinical techniques such that outcomes may be appropriately compared across studies.

Third-Generation Autologous Chondrocyte Implantation (Cells Cultured Within Collagen Membrane) Is Superior to Microfracture for Focal Chondral Defects of the Knee Joint: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To systematically review randomized controlled trials to compare clinical outcomes of microfracture (MFx) versus third-generation autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) for the treatment of focal chondral defects (FCDs) of the knee joint. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE to locate randomized controlled trials comparing minimum 2-year clinical outcomes of patients undergoing MFx versus third-generation ACI for FCDs of the knee joint. The search terms used were: "knee" AND "microfracture" AND "autologous chondrocyte" AND "randomized." Patients were evaluated based on treatment failure rates, magnetic resonance imaging, International Cartilage Repair Society scores, and patient-reported outcome scores (Lysholm, Tegner, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, modified Cincinnati Knee Rating System, 12-item Short Form Health Survey Physical and Mental, and the EuroQol 5 Dimensions Visual Analog Scale score). RESULTS: Six studies (5 Level I, 1 Level II) met inclusion criteria, including a total of 238 patients undergoing MFx and 274 undergoing ACI. Two studies had an overlapping cohort of patients and therefore the study with longer follow-up was used in all analyses. The average follow-up among patients ranged from 2.0 years to 6.0 years. Average lesion size ranged from 1.8 cm2 to 5.0 cm2. Treatment failure ranged from 0% to 1.8% in the ACI group and 2.5% to 8.3% in the MFx group. In 4 studies, ACI patients demonstrated significantly greater improvement in multiple Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score subscores compared with MFx. In 2 studies, patients who received ACI demonstrated significantly greater improvement in the Tegner score compared to MFx, and 1 study showed significantly greater improvement in the Lysholm and ICRS scores for ACI compared with MFx. CONCLUSIONS: At short-term follow-up, third-generation ACI demonstrates a lower failure rate and greater improvement in patient-reported outcomes compared with MFx for FCDs of the knee joint. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II, systematic review of Levels I-II studies.

The Everted Acetabular Labrum: Patho-anatomy, Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Arthroscopic Findings of a Native Variant.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to introduce a native labral variant, the everted acetabular labrum, and to describe the patho-anatomy, magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance arthrogram (MRI/MRA) characteristics and the arthroscopic findings in this condition. METHODS: All primary hip arthroscopy procedures performed by the senior author between June 2013 and January 2020 were reviewed retrospectively. An everted acetabular labrum was identified as a segment of labrum that lacked apposition to the femoral head with the hip off traction. All everted labra were treated with labral advancement and repair with or without augmentation or reconstruction. The labrum-to-femoral head distance was measured in 3T MRI/MRA at the 1-2 o'clock position. A random selection of 38 hips without an everted labrum served as controls to compare radiographic parameters. RESULTS: A total of 68 hips were identified as having an everted labrum during the study period (mean age, 29.1 years), and 55 hips had advanced imaging available for review. MRI/MRA scans revealed the everted labrum to have a triangular shape in 17 hips (31%) and a blunted/round shape in 38 hips (69%), which differed significantly from controls (triangular 25/38 [66%], blunted 13/38 [34%], P < 0.001). The average labrum-to-femoral head distance was 1.4 mm for everted labra versus 0.0 mm for controls (P < 0.0001) and the mean labral lengths and widths were significantly shorter than those of controls (both P < 0.01). Of the hips, 8 underwent labral reconstruction or augmentation, and 61 underwent labral advancement/repair. CONCLUSION: The everted acetabular labrum is a native variant that is identifiable during hip arthroscopy by assessing the labral seal off traction. Preoperative MRI/MRA findings can be highly predictive of an everted labrum. Surgical treatment includes labral advancement and repair or reconstruction to restore contact between the labrum and the femoral head. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective comparative study.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Hyaluronic Acid for Hip Osteoarthritis Yields Similarly Beneficial Short-Term Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Level I and II Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature to compare the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) injections for the treatment of hip osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the clinical efficacy of PRP and HA injections for hip OA. The search phrase used was hip, osteoarthritis, platelet-rich plasma, hyaluronic acid, randomized. Patients were assessed based on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, and the Harris Hip Score (HHS). Subanalyses were performed for any outcome score in which ≥3 studies reported results. RESULTS: Six studies (5 level I, 1 level II) met inclusion criteria, including 211 patients undergoing intra-articular injection with PRP (mean age 60.0 years, mean follow-up 12.2 months) and 197 patients with HA (mean age 62.3 years, mean follow-up 11.9 months). No significant differences were found in the weighted improvement of any outcome score (WOMAC, VAS, or HHS) from preinjection to postinjection between groups. When excluding a study with the highest risk of bias to eliminate heterogeneity, pooled subanalysis demonstrated no significant differences in WOMAC subscores between PRP and HA groups. Similarly, in a pooled subanalysis that isolated patients treated with leukocyte-poor PRP, no significant differences in WOMAC subscores were found between PRP and HA groups. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing treatment for hip OA with either PRP or HA injections can expect to experience similarly beneficial short-term clinical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II, systematic review of level I and II studies.