Can Hip Passive Range of Motion Predict Hip Microinstability? A Comparative Study.

Background: Hip microinstability is an increasingly recognized cause of pain and disability in young adults. It is unknown whether differences in passive hip range of motion (ROM) exist between patients with versus without hip microinstability. Hypothesis: Underlying ligamentous and capsular laxity will result in differences in clinically detectable passive ROM between patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), patients with microinstability, and asymptomatic controls. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing hip arthroscopy between 2012 and 2018 was conducted. Patients with a diagnosis of isolated microinstability based on intraoperative findings were identified and classified as having isolated FAI, instability, or FAI + instability. Patients without a history of hip injury were included as controls. Range of motion was recorded in the supine position for flexion, internal rotation, and external rotation. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed on each measurement in isolation as well as combinations of motion to include total rotation arc, flexion + rotation arc, and flexion + 2× rotation arc Models were then created and tested to predict instability status. Results: In total, 263 hips were included: 69 with isolated instability, 50 with FAI, 50 with FAI + instability, and 94 control hips. A higher proportion of patients in the instability and FAI + instability groups were female compared with the FAI and control groups (P < .001). On univariate analysis, differences were found in all groups in all planes of motion (P < .001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated differences in all groups in flexion and flexion + rotation arc. In symptomatic patients, the best performing predictive model for hip microinstability was flexion + rotation arc ≥200° (Akaike information criterion, 132.3; P < .001) with a sensitivity of 68.9%, specificity of 80.0%, positive predictive value of 89.1%, and negative predictive value of 51.9%. Conclusion: Patients with hip microinstability had significantly greater ROM than symptomatic and asymptomatic cohorts without hip microinstability. Symptomatic patients with hip flexion + rotation arc ≥200° were highly likely to have positive intraoperative findings for hip microinstability, whereas instability status was difficult to predict in patients with a flexion + rotation arc of <200°.

No significant difference in risk of prolonged opioid use following outpatient versus inpatient total shoulder arthroplasty: A propensity matched analysis.

Background: The purpose of this investigation was to compare rates of filled opioid prescriptions and prolonged opioid use in opioid naïve patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in inpatient versus outpatient settings. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using a national insurance claims database. Inpatient and outpatient cohorts were created by identifying continuously enrolled, opioid naïve TSA patients. A greedy nearest-neighbor algorithm was used to match baseline demographic characteristics between cohorts with a 1:1 inpatient to outpatient ratio to compare the primary outcomes of filled opioid prescriptions and prolonged opioid use following surgery between cohorts. Results: A total of 11,703 opioid naïve patients (mean age 72.5 ± 8.5 years, 54.5% female, 87.6% inpatient) were included for analysis. After propensity score matching (n = 1447 inpatients; n = 1447 outpatients), outpatient TSA patients were significantly more likely to fill an opioid prescription in the perioperative window compared to inpatients (82.9% versus 71.5%, p < 0.001). No significant differences in prolonged opioid use were detected (5.74% inpatient versus 6.77% outpatient; p = 0.25). Conclusions: Outpatient TSA patients were more likely to fill opioid prescriptions compared to inpatient TSA patients. The quantity of opioids prescribed and rates of prolonged opioid use were similar between the cohorts. Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III.

Gadolinium injected concurrently with anesthetic can result in false-negative diagnostic intra-articular hip injections.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the response to intra-articular hip injections with and without concurrent gadolinium administration. Our secondary outcome was to compare post-operative outcomes between patients with an initial false-negative gadolinium-containing injection and a matched control group. METHODS: Patients receiving a series of two hip diagnostic intra-articular injections (DIAI), the first with gadolinium for concurrent MRA and the second without gadolinium, were retrospectively identified. Pain response to DIAI, injectate volume, local anesthetic volume, inclusion of corticosteroids, and method of injection were compared between injections. False-negative injection was defined as < 50% pain relief with concurrent gadolinium, but ≥ 50% pain relief with subsequent anesthetic injection without gadolinium. False-negative injections in patients that ultimately underwent primary hip arthroscopy were identified from this cohort and matched in a 3:1 ratio to a control cohort to compare short-term post-operative single assessment numerical evaluation (SANE) outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-three patients underwent a series of anesthetic injections with and without gadolinium and met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Pain response was significantly different in injections performed with and without gadolinium (18% vs. 81%; p < 0.001). There were significant differences in total injectate volume, local anesthetic volume, corticosteroid use, and method of injection between injections, but these variables were not correlated with pain response. Fifteen patients with false-negative responses to injection underwent primary hip arthroscopy and were matched in a 3:1 ratio to a control cohort. There was no difference in short-term post-operative SANE scores between the gadolinium-sensitive and control groups (81.6 vs. 80.0, n.s.). CONCLUSION: Concurrent administration of intra-articular gadolinium with DIAI may result in a false-negative response to anesthetic. Additionally, in patients with initial false-negative DIAI with gadolinium, short-term post-operative outcomes after hip arthroscopy are similar to a matched cohort. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

The diagnosis of hip microinstability is correlated with ease of intra-operative hip distraction.

PURPOSE: Hip microinstability has emerged as a contributor to young adult, non-arthritic hip pain. There is a paucity of objective clinical data to identify patients with hip microinstability and guide surgical treatment. The purpose of this study was to identify the degree of distractibility in patients with and without microinstability undergoing hip arthroscopy. METHODS: A single-surgeon series of hip arthroscopies were retrospectively reviewed from 2014-2020. All procedures were performed with paralysis on a fracture table with a perineal post where 1 turn of fine traction equates to 4 mm of axial traction. Diagnosis was recorded as isolated instability, instability plus femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), and isolated FAI. Operative reports were reviewed to collect patient demographic data, number of turns of traction required for adequate distraction of the femoral head relative to the acetabulum (10 mm), and the presence of residual subluxation after initial traction was released. RESULTS: A total of 464 patients were identified, 26 (5.6%) with isolated microinstability, 183 (39.4%) with microinstability with FAI anatomy, and 255 (55.0%) with FAI. The concurrent diagnosis of microinstability was associated with decreased turns required to adequately distract the hip. Isolated microinstability patients required 6.9 turns (IQR 4.6-8.8) while those with instability plus FAI required 8.8 turns (IQR 6.5-11) and isolated FAI required 19.1 turns (IQR 15-22). Residual subluxation after removal of negative intra-articular pressure but before performing the hip arthroscopy was more commonly associated with instability, occurring in 84.6% of isolated instability and 86.9% of instability plus FAI as compared with 29.8% in the isolated FAI cohort. CONCLUSION: A diagnosis of hip microinstability, with or without features of FAI, is associated with decreased axial traction required to distract the hip. These data support the use of intra-operative ease of distraction as a method of identifying patients with hip microinstability. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Are Oblique Views Necessary? A Review of the Clinical Value of Oblique Knee Radiographs in the Acute Setting.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to assess the added clinical value of oblique knee radiographs four-view (4V) compared to orthogonal anteroposterior (AP) and lateral radiographs in a two-view (2V) series. METHODS: We obtained 200 adult, 4V knee radiographs in 200 patients in the ED and randomly divided them into two groups with 100 series in each group. Ten reviewers - three musculoskeletal radiologists and seven orthopedic surgeons - performed radiograph analyses. These reviewers were randomly divided evenly into group one and group two. Reviewers were blinded to patient data and first reviewed 2V radiographs (AP/lateral) only, and then reviewed 4V radiographs, including AP/lateral, and two additional oblique views for the same patients at least four weeks later. Acute pathology identification and the need for further imaging was assessed for all reviewers, and clinical decision-making (operative vs nonoperative treatment, need for admission, need for additional imaging) was assessed only by the seven orthopaedic surgeon reviewers. RESULTS: Mean sensitivity for pathology identification was 79% with 2V and 81% with 4V (P =0.25). Intra-observer kappa value was 0.81 (range 0.54-1.00). Additional oblique radiographs led orthopaedic reviewers to change their treatment recommendations in 62/329 patients (18.84%) (P <0.001). Eight of 329 radiographic series were identified as "critical misses." (2.43%) (P =0.004), when pathology was reported as normal or reviewers recommended nonoperative treatment on 2V radiographs but changed their recommendation to operative management after the addition of oblique radiographs. The number needed to treat (NNT) for any treatment change and for "critical misses" was 83 and 643, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although the addition of oblique radiographs may improve a clinician's ability to identify subtle pathologic findings not identified on 2V, it rarely leads to significant changes in treatment recommendations. Given the high NNT, limiting the usage of these oblique radiographs in the general patient population may reduce costs without significantly affecting patient care.

Central Femoral Head Chondromalacia Is Associated with a Diagnosis of Hip Instability.

Purpose: To compare the locations and patterns of femoral head chondral damage in patients with instability in contrast to those with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) without instability. Methods: All consecutive hip arthroscopies were reviewed from 2013 to 2020 from a single surgeon. Intraoperative records were reviewed on all patients identified to have femoral head chondromalacia. Data were collected to include laterality, location of femoral head chondromalacia, intraoperative diagnosis (instability and/or FAI subtype), and ease of distractibility. The location of the femoral head chondromalacia was defined on the basis of intraoperative description. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were used for categorical variables, and a two-sample t test was used for continuous variables. Statistical significance was set at P < .05. Results: A total of 64 patients were in the study cohort, with 32 patients identified as having non-central head chondromalacia and 32 patients identified as having central head chondromalacia. Of the patients with central head chondromalacia, 81% were diagnosed with instability. Central head chondromalacia was associated with a sensitivity of 84% (71%-97%), specificity of 82% (69%-95%), and positive predictive value of 81% (67%-95%). Conclusions: A high percentage of patients with central femoral head chondromalacia were found to have hip microinstability. These results suggest that there is a pattern of femoral head chondral damage in patients with hip microinstability. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

Female gender, decreased lateral center edge angle and a positive hyperextension-external rotation test are associated with ease of hip distractability at time of hip arthroscopy.

PURPOSE: To identify factors associated with ease of hip distraction at the time of hip arthroscopy. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients 17-50 years old undergoing hip arthroscopy with a single high-volume hip arthroscopist was performed from 2014 to 2020. Demographics, clinical history, examination, and imaging findings were collected. Distractibility was quantified using turns of fine traction (1 turn = 4 mm axial distraction) with the patient paralyzed on a fracture table with a well-padded perineal post Fine axial traction was applied after the patient's perineum contacted the post. Demographic and clinical predictors of ease of distractibility were analyzed with simple linear regression models. Significant predictors were subsequently added to a multivariable linear regression model, estimating the effect of each variable. RESULTS: In total, 453 patients were included, with an average age of 31.6 years (± 9.2) and 45.9% females. In univariate analysis, gender, race, BMI, range of motion, hyperextension-external rotation (HEER) test, the abduction-extension-external rotation test, and lateral center edge angle (LCEA) were associated with the number of fine traction turns required to distract the hip. On multivariable analysis, lower LCEA (p = 0.002), female gender (p < 0.001), and a positive HEER test (p = 0.045) were associated with decreased turns required for adequate hip distraction. CONCLUSION: Female gender, decreased LCEA, and a positive HEER test are associated with decreased axial traction required for adequate hip distraction at the time of hip arthroscopy. As ease of distractibility has been associated with hip microinstability, these findings may allow pre-operative identification of hip instability patients and aid in pre-operative counseling, risk stratification and capsular management planning. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Preoperative identification of risk factors for ease of hip distraction may raise pre-surgical suspicion and, when coupled with other intraoperative findings, may aid in the diagnosis and management of hip microinstability.

Hip Microinstability: Understanding a Newly Defined Hip Pathology in Young Athletes.

Microinstability is an increasingly recognized diagnosis in young athletes presenting with hip pain. Causes of microinstability may include abnormality of the hip bony anatomy, acetabular labral tears, joint capsule laxity or injury, and muscle dysfunction. Borderline hip dysplasia is an increasingly recognized factor predisposing to microinstability. The capsuloligamentous structures of the hip, particularly the iliofemoral ligament, provide important restraints to femoral head motion, and iatrogenic defects can predispose patients to instability after surgery. Injury to the acetabular labrum may disrupt its important hip-stabilizing properties including the suction seal and improved acetabular depth. Hip muscle weakness or imbalance may result in increased femoral head motion within the acetabulum. The diagnosis of hip microinstability can be challenging, and the history is often nonspecific. Physical examination maneuvers include the anterior apprehension, prone instability, axial distraction, and abduction-hyperextension-external rotation tests. Radiographic features may include borderline hip dysplasia, femoral head-neck junction cliff sign, and an elevated femoral-epiphyseal acetabular roof index. Magnetic resonance arthrography may demonstrate a capsular defect, capsular thinning, or labral pathology. Diagnostic intra-articular injection of anesthetic can confirm the intra-articular nature of the pathology. Management of hip microinstability focuses on strengthening the dynamic stabilizers of the hip through focused physical therapy. Surgery may be considered in recalcitrant cases where symptoms persist despite optimization of hip stabilizer strength. In such cases, addressing the primary source of instability through labral repair or reconstruction and capsular repair or plication can be considered. In highly selected cases, surgery can result in excellent outcomes.

Editorial Commentary: Identifying the Problem Is Only the First Step in Fixing Disparities in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Care.

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACL-R) is one of the most commonly performed orthopaedic surgeries. Social determinants of health, including race, ethnicity, income, education, insurance, and employment status, are major nonmodifiable risk factors for worse outcomes and higher complication rates after ACL-R. Improved understanding of these variables can help surgeons assess risk and counsel their patients, but evidence-based solutions to improving access to care and outcomes after ACL-R in at-risk patients are needed.

Editorial Commentary: Is the Pendulum "Swinging" Away From Patellar Fixation in Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction?

Medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction is the "workhorse" for surgical stabilization of recurrent patella instability. Complications of patella fixation (i.e., patella fracture) are rare but potentially catastrophic. Modifications to traditional MPFL reconstruction that avoid patella fixation are promising. These alternatives may be favored in high-risk scenarios such as revision, smaller pediatric cases, and patellofemoral arthroplasty with concomitant instability. Large-scale prospective and/or randomized studies are needed to differentiate between MPFL reconstruction techniques.

National Trends Show Declining Use of Arthroscopic Subacromial Decompression Without Rotator Cuff Repair.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to investigate trends in the United States for arthroscopic subacromial decompression (aSAD) and open SAD (oSAD) with and without rotator cuff repair (RCR) between 2010 and 2018. METHODS: The PearlDiver Mariner claims database was queried using CPT codes for open and arthroscopic subacromial decompression and rotator cuff repair. Patient cohorts were developed for those undergoing aSAD or oSAD between 2010 and 2018, then segmented by whether RCR was performed simultaneously. Annual incidence was analyzed, as were associated diagnosis codes, and concomitant shoulder-associated procedures performed on the same day. RESULTS: The PearlDiver Mariner dataset from 2010 to 2018 included 186,932 patients that underwent aSAD, while 9,263 patients underwent oSAD. The total incidence of aSAD declined from 118.0 to 71.3 per 100,000 (39.6% decrease) (P < .001). This change was due primarily to a decreasing incidence of aSAD performed without RCR, which declined from 66.3 to 25.5 per 100,000 (61.5% decrease) (P < .001). During the same period, the incidence of aSAD combined with RCR remained relatively stable, from 51.7 to 45.8 per 100,000 (11.5% decrease) (P = .27). The overall incidence of oSAD declined from 7.1 to 2.2 per 100,000 (68.1% decrease) (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The overall rate of aSAD has declined in recent years, primarily due to a large decrease in the incidence of aSAD without RCR as an isolated treatment for rotator cuff disorders. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Prior studies have demonstrated a rising incidence of SAD; however, high-level clinical evidence and clinical practice guidelines have challenged its efficacy. It is important for orthopaedic surgeons to understand evolving national trends in management among their peers.

Effect of Global Fracture Care Billing on Distal Radius Fractures.

Nonoperative distal radius fracture treatment without manipulation can be coded and billed in a global fee or itemized structure. Little is known regarding the association between these coding/billing structures and subsequent clinical care. The MarketScan Research Database (IBM, Armonk, New York) was retrospectively queried for patients with a distal radius fracture diagnosis code from 2003 to 2014. Patients with a Current Procedural Terminology code for surgical treatment or closed treatment with manipulation were excluded. The remaining nonoperatively treated patients were separated based on billing structure. Results were analyzed for provider initiating global fracture care, as well as the likelihood and frequency of follow-up visits related to the injury for each group. A total of 381,561 patients were identified based on inclusion criteria. Global fracture care billing was initiated for 177,153 (46%) patients, whereas itemized billing was performed for 204,408 (54%) patients. Orthopedic surgeons were the most likely provider (69%) to initiate global fracture care after diagnosis of distal radius fracture. Emergency physicians were the second most common specialty (6%). Patients for whom global fracture care was initiated were more likely to not receive any follow-up office visits compared with patients for whom itemized billing was performed (39.2% vs 25.4%). Additionally, patients with global billing had significantly fewer office visits during the 90-day global period (1.3 vs 2.3). This study demonstrates that patients billed via global fracture care have less frequent follow-up and fewer office visits during the 90-day global period than patients billed in itemized fashion. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(5);e471-e475.].

Superior Capsule Reconstruction With Subacromial Allograft Spacer: Biomechanical Cadaveric Study of Subacromial Contact Pressure and Superior Humeral Head Translation.

PURPOSE: To investigate the biomechanical effects of superior capsule reconstruction with subacromial allograft spacer on superior humeral head translation and subacromial contact pressure. METHODS: Eight cadaveric shoulder specimens were tested in 4 conditions: (1) intact rotator cuff, (2) supraspinatus tear and superior capsule excision, (3) superior capsule reconstruction with human dermal allograft, and (4) superior capsule reconstruction with subacromial resurfacing using human dermal allograft. In each condition, specimens were tested at 0, 30, 60, and 90° of shoulder abduction in balanced and unbalanced loaded states for subacromial contact pressure and superior humeral head translation. Statistical comparisons were made using a repeated-measures analysis of variance test, followed by a Tukey post hoc test for pairwise comparisons. A P value <.05 was set as statistically significant. RESULTS: Superior humeral head translation and subacromial contact pressure were increased after irreparable rotator cuff tear (P = .001). There was no significant difference between superior capsule reconstruction and intact cuff in regard to superior humeral head translation and subacromial contact pressure at all abduction angles. Superior capsule reconstruction with subacromial resurfacing decreased superior humeral head translation relative to intact (0°, P = .004; 30°, P = .02; 60°, P = .08; 90°, P = .01), superior capsule reconstruction (0°, P = .001; 30°, P = .003; 60°, P = .019; 90°, P = .001), and cuff-deficient states (P = .001). Superior capsule reconstruction with subacromial resurfacing resulted in nonsignificant increases in subacromial contact pressure relative to intact cuff at 0 to 90° abduction angles. CONCLUSIONS: Superior capsule reconstruction with subacromial resurfacing using human dermal allograft results in decreased superior humeral head translation relative to superior capsule reconstruction with human dermal allograft only, while increasing subacromial contact pressure. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Superior capsule reconstruction with subacromial resurfacing using human dermal allograft reduces superior humeral head translation while increasing subacromial contact pressure in a cadaveric model.

Orthopaedic Shoulder Surgery in the Ambulatory Surgical Center: Safety and Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To determine whether the risk of adverse events and readmission after non-arthroplasty shoulder surgery is influenced by the outpatient setting of surgical care and to identify risk factors associated with these adverse events. METHODS: The Humana Claims Database was queried for all patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery and related open procedures in the hospital-based outpatient department (HOPD) or ambulatory surgical center (ASC) setting, using the PearlDiver supercomputer. Arthroplasty procedures were excluded because they carry a risk profile different from that of other outpatient surgical procedures. Outcome variables included unanticipated admission after surgery, readmission, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and wound infection within 90 days of surgery. The ASC and HOPD cohorts were propensity score matched, and outcomes were compared between them. Finally, logistic regression models were created to identify risk factors associated with unplanned admission after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 84,658 patients met the inclusion criteria for the study: 28,730 in the ASC cohort and 56,819 in the HOPD cohort. The rates of all queried outcomes were greater in the HOPD cohort and achieved statistical significance. Sex, region, race, insurance status, comorbidity burden, anesthesia type, and procedural type were included in the regression analysis of unplanned admission. Factors associated with unplanned admission included increasing Charlson Comorbidity Index (odds ratio [OR], 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-1.17; P < .001); HOPD service location (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 2.18-2.58; P < .001); general anesthesia (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.08-1.59; P = .008); male sex (OR, 2.58; 95% CI, 2.17-3.15; P = .007); and open surgery (OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.90-2.61; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The lower rates of perioperative morbidity in the ASC cohort suggest that proper patient selection is taking place and lends reassurance to surgeons who are practicing or are considering practicing in an ASC. Patients to whom some or all the risk factors for unplanned admission apply (male sex, higher comorbidity burden, open surgery) may be more suitable for HOPDs because admission from an ASC can be difficult and potentially unsafe. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, comparative study.

The effect of surgical setting on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction outcomes.

Objective: Ambulatory surgical centers (ASC's) have emerged as an alternative to the traditional hospital- based outpatient department (HOPD). We aim to determine the effect of surgical setting on adverse events following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR).Methods: The Humana Claims Database was queried for all patients undergoing ACLR in the HOPD or ASC setting, using the PearlDiver supercomputer. To eliminate selection bias in our study, the HOPD and ASC cohorts were propensity score matched on baseline demographics, comorbidities, and operative factors. Comparisons between the matched cohorts were made using chi-square tests. Logistic regression models were created to determine the effect of surgical setting on adverse events.Results: A total of 13,647 patients were queried in our study, 5,298 of whom underwent surgery in an ASC and 8,349 of whom underwent surgery in an HOPD. Analysis of the post-matched cohort revealed no differences between cohorts for mechanical failure, nerve injury, pulmonary embolism, septic joint, wound infection, revision surgery and readmission. Rates of deep vein thrombosis (1.18% vs 1.84%; p = .03) were significantly lower in the ASC group. On logistic regression, ASC was associated with decreased risk for deep vein thrombosis (.87, .83-.93) and pulmonary embolism (.85, .78-.95).Conclusion: ACLR performed in ASC is associated with reduced risk of venous thromboembolism and no difference in surgical morbidity and readmissions versus ACLR performed in HOPD. Development of a standardized algorithm for patient selection in the ASC setting is needed to preserve acceptability of ASC-based ACLR in cost-savings and patient safety models.