Do postoperative outcomes vary between midshaft clavicle fractures of 2, 3, or more than 3 fragments?

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess differences in clinical and surgical outcomes associated with the surgical treatment of midshaft clavicle fractures of different complexities based on fragment number. Additionally, the investigation seeks to present the outcomes of a series of patients who underwent surgery at our institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the medical records of patients aged over 18 who underwent midshaft clavicle fracture surgery at our center from November 2009 to May 2021. Patients were categorized based on the number of fracture fragments into groups of two, three, or more than three fragments. Consolidation, implant removal, complications, surgical duration, and functional outcomes (assessed through VAS, ASES, and Constant-Murley scale) were evaluated for each specific group and for the overall cohort. RESULTS: In total, 260 patients were analyzed. There were no significant differences in any of the parameters between the three groups except for surgical time, which was shorter in simple fractures than in those with more than three fragments (68.2 min vs. 75.3 min; p = 0.01). Pseudoarthrosis rate was 2.69%, implant removal rate was 9.61%, and 4.23% of patients presented with complications other than the previous ones. Functional results were excellent, with averages of 97.3 (72.7-100) for the ASES score, 97.5 (75-100) for the Constant score, and 0.6 (0-8) on the VAS. CONCLUSION: According to our results, there were no differences in postoperative results between simple and multifragmentary midshaft clavicle fractures. Patients across all groups reported satisfactory results.

Establishing the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient Acceptable Symptom State Thresholds Following Arthroscopic Capsular Release for the Treatment of Idiopathic Shoulder Adhesive Capsulitis.

PURPOSE: To determine the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) threshold for the visual analog scale (VAS), Constant, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores following arthroscopic capsular release for the treatment of idiopathic shoulder adhesive capsulitis. METHODS: A retrospective review of prospective collected data was performed in patients undergoing arthroscopic capsular release for the treatment of idiopathic adhesive capsulitis at a single institution from January 2018 through January 2019. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected preoperatively and 6 months' postoperatively. Delta was defined as the change between preoperative and 6 months' postoperative scores. Distribution-based and anchored-based (response to a satisfaction question at 1 year) approaches were used to estimate MCIDs and PASS, respectively. The optimal cut-off point where sensitivity and specificity were maximized (Youden index) and the percentage of patients achieving those thresholds were also calculated. RESULTS: Overall, a total of 100 patients without diabetes who underwent arthroscopic capsular release and completed baseline and 6-month patient-reported outcome measures were included. The distribution-based MCID for VAS, Constant, SANE, and ASES were calculated to be 1.1, 10.1, 9.3, and 8.2, respectively. The rate of patients who achieved MCID thresholds was 98% for VAS, 96% for Constant, 98% for SANE, and 99% for ASES. The PASS threshold values for VAS, Constant, and ASES were ≤2, ≥70, ≥80, and ≥80, respectively. The rate of patients who achieved PASS thresholds was 84% for VAS, 84% for Constant, 89% for SANE, and 78% for ASES. CONCLUSIONS: In patients without diabetes and idiopathic adhesive capsulitis, high rates of MCID and PASS thresholds can be achieved with arthroscopic anteroinferior capsular release LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective cohort study.

Injerto de cresta ilíaca como cirugía de revisión de Latarjet fallida por inestabilidad glenohumeral en deportistas / Iliac crest graft for previous failed Latarjet surgery with glenohumeral instability in athletes

Introducción: El objetivo de este estudio es reportar los resultados funcionales, el retorno al deporte, la tasa de consolidación y las complicaciones en deportistas jóvenes con una cirugía de Latarjet previa fallida, tratados con injerto autólogo de cresta ilíaca.Materiales y métodos: entre el 2017 y el 2020, se operaron en nuestra institución doce pacientes con inestabilidad glenohumeral recurrente luego de una estabilización previa fallida con cirugía de Latarjet, con injerto autólogo de cresta ilíaca como cirugía de revisión. La evaluación funcional se realizó con el score de Rowe, la escala visual análoga (EVA) y el score de ASOSS. Evaluamos el porcentaje de retorno al deporte, el nivel alcanzado y el tiempo que tardaron los deportistas en volver a competir. La consolidación ósea y la posición adecuada del injerto se analizó en todos los casos con radiografías de hombro frente y perfil y tomografía axial computada con reconstrucción 3D. Se registraron las complicaciones y las revisiones.Resultados: el seguimiento promedio fue de 42.6 meses (rango 24 a 92 meses). El score de Rowe, la EVA y el ASOSS mejoraron significativamente luego de la cirugía (p <0.1). Nueve pacientes retornaron al deporte, ocho de ellos al mismo nivel. El injerto óseo consolidó en todos los pacientes. No hubo recurrencias. No se reportaron complicaciones.Conclusión: el injerto autólogo de cresta ilíaca es una opción válida para el tratamiento de deportistas con inestabilidad glenohumeral recurrente luego de una estabilización previa fallida con cirugía de Latarjet. Nivel de Evidencia: IV

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to report the functional results, return to sport, consolidation rate and complications in young athletes with a previous failed Latarjet surgery, treated with an autologous iliac crest graft.Materials and methods: between 2017 and 2020, twelve patients with recurrent glenohumeral instability were operated on at our institution after previous failed stabilization with Latarjet surgery with autologous iliac crest graft as revision surgery. Functional evaluation was performed with the Rowe score, the VAS, and the ASOSS score. We evaluated the percentage of return to sport, the level reached, and the time it took the athletes to compete again. Bone consolidation and the adequate position of the graft were evaluated in all cases with front and profile X-rays of the shoulder and computed tomography with 3D reconstruction. Complications and revisions were recorded.Results: the average follow-up was 42.6 months (range 24 to 92 months). The Rowe score, visual analog scale, and ASOSS were significantly improved after surgery (p <0.1). Nine patients returned to sport, eight of them at the same level. The bone graft consolidated in all patients. There were no recurrences. No complications were reported.Conclusion: autologous iliac crest grafting is a valid option for the treatment of athletes with recurrent glenohumeral instability after previous failed stabilization with a Latarjet procedure. Level of Evidence: IV