[Comparison of mid-term effectiveness between diabetic secondary stiff shoulder and primary frozen shoulder after arthroscopic shoulder capsular release combined with acromiohumeral distance restoration].

Objective: To compare the mid-term effectiveness of arthroscopic shoulder capsular release combined with acromiohumeral distance (AHD) restoration in the treatment of diabetic secondary stiff shoulder and primary frozen shoulder. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on clinical data of 22 patients with diabetic secondary stiff shoulder (group A) and 33 patients with primary frozen shoulder (group B), who underwent arthroscopic 270° capsular release combined with AHD restoration treatment. There was no significant difference between the two groups in gender, age, affected side, disease duration, and preoperative AHD, shoulder flexion range of motion, abduction range of motion, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, and Constant score ( P>0.05). Only the difference in the internal rotation cone rank and external rotation range of motion between the two groups showed significant differences ( P<0.05). The improvement in shoulder pain and function was evaluated by using VAS score, ASES score, and Constant score before operation and at last follow-up. Active flexion, abduction, external rotation range of motion, and internal rotation cone rank were recorded and compared. AHD was measured on X-ray films. Results: All patients were followed up 24-92 months (median, 57 months). There was no significant difference in follow-up time between group A and group B ( P>0.05). No fractures or glenoid labrum tears occurred during operation, all incisions healed by first intention, and no complication such as wound infection or nerve injury was observed during the follow-up. At last follow-up, there were significant improvements in active flexion, abduction, external rotation range of motion, internal rotation cone rank, AHD, VAS score, ASES score, and Constant score when compared with preoperative ones in both groups ( P<0.05). Except for the difference in change in external rotation range of motion, which had significant difference between the two groups ( P<0.05), there was no significant difference in other indicators between the two groups ( P>0.05). Conclusion: Arthroscopic capsular release combined with AHD restoration can achieve good mid-term effectiveness in the treatment of diabetic secondary stiff shoulder and primary frozen shoulder. However, the improvement in external rotation range of motion is more significant in the patients with diabetic secondary stiff shoulder.

Arthroscopic Capsular Release Versus Manipulation under Anesthesia for Refractory Frozen Shoulder: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Frozen shoulder (FS) is a painful and debilitating condition affecting the shoulder joint. When patients fail to improve after conservative treatments, operative treatments including arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) and manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) are recommended. However, the comparison between these two interventions remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ACR and MUA for refractory FS. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for eligible studies until December 10, 2023. Meta-analyses were conducted using Manager V.5.3.3. Pooled effect sizes were expressed as the weighted mean difference (WMD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of eight comparative studies with 768 patients were included. Compared with MUA, ACR had statistically better Δ VAS (WMD, -0.44; 95% CI, -0.71 to -0.18; I2 = 6%; p = 0.001) at over 12-month follow-up, which did not reach the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Other outcomes regarding pain relief, function, and range of motion (ROM) improvements were not statistically different between the two groups at different follow-up timepoints. Compared with the MUA group, the ACR group had a significantly higher rate of severe complications (OR, 4.14; 95% CI, 1.01 to 16.94; I2 = 0%; p = 0.05), but comparable rates of mild complications and additional intervention. CONCLUSIONS: In treating refractory FS, ACR demonstrated comparable pain relief, functional and ROM improvements, rates of mild complications and additional intervention but a higher risk of severe complications to MUA during short-term follow-up periods. Notably, ACR exhibited statistically superior improvement in the long-term pain relief compared to the MUA group, although it did not reach the MCID.

Functional results of Circumferential Capsular Release in adhesive shoulder capsulitis. Comparative study of patients over and under fifty years of age.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of our study is to evaluate the functional and mobility outcomes in patients who have undergone arthroscopic circumferential arthrolysis of the shoulder and to find out if there are differences in the results in relation to the patient's age. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective case series of patients with idiopathic adhesive capsulitis treated by arthroscopic 360º circumferential capsulotomy in lateral position and followed for a minimum of 2 years. Range of motion (ROM), functional outcomes using the Constant Score (CS), health-related quality of life outcomes with the EuroQol Five Dimensions tool (EQ-5D), pain using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). RESULTS: A total of 26 shoulders were included, 10 men (41.7%) and 14 women (58.3%), with 2 patients being bilateral. The mean age was 48.64 ± 7.5 years, and the mean follow-up was 50.2 months. Postoperative ROM improved significantly compared to preoperative ROM (p < 0.05). Shoulder forward flexion improved by 38.6° (95%CI 22.3-54.9, p < 0.01), abduction by 35.2° (95%CI 17.6-52.8, p < 0.01) and external rotation by 21.9° (95%CI 12.8-30.9, p < 0.01 p < 0.01). Median internal rotation improved from buttock to T12 (p < 0.01). The mean improvement in CS was 54.3 ± 24.4 points (p < 0.01). The EQ-5D and VAS scores at the end of follow-up were 0.73 ± 0.23 and 2.73 ± 2.55, respectively. There were no statistical differences between young patients and patients aged 50 years or older in ROM or functional results. CONCLUSIONS: Patient age did not affect outcomes significantly, with patients older than 50 years showing similar results to younger patients.

Arthroscopic capsular release for frozen shoulder: when etiology matters.

PURPOSE: No therapeutic intervention is universally accepted for frozen shoulder, and the most effective management to restore motion and diminish pain has yet to be defined. The aim of this study was to investigate functional and psychological outcomes in patients who underwent arthroscopic capsular release for a frozen shoulder. METHODS: A retrospective study with prospective data collection was conducted with 78 patients suffering from frozen shoulder resistance to conservative treatment. Considering the etiology, there were 36 (46.2%) idiopathic, 31 (39.7%) postoperative, and 11 (14.1%) posttraumatic cases. Preoperatively, each patient was evaluated with the range of motion (ROM) assessment and the Constant-Murley score (CMS). At follow-up, the 4-point subjective satisfaction scale (SSS), the ROM assessment, the SF-12 questionnaire, the numerical rating scale (NRS) for the subjective assessment of pain, the CMS and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) were assessed. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 54.2 ± 22.3 months, ROM and CMS showed a statistically significant improvement between pre- and postoperative values (all p < 0.001). Before surgery, the mean CMS was 36.9% that of sex- and age-matched healthy individuals, and all patients showed a CMS lower than the normative data. At the final follow-up visit, the mean CMS was 99.9% that of sex- and age-matched healthy individuals, and 49 (62.8%) patients showed a CMS equal to or higher than the normative data. The mean increase in the CMS was 56.1 ± 8.3 points. The mean SSS, HADS-A, HADS-D, and NRS were 3.7 ± 0.5, 2.5 ± 1.6, 2.2 ± 1.3, and 2.2 ± 1.0, respectively. All patients returned to their previous level of work and sports activity after 2 and 2.5 months, respectively. The multivariate analysis showed the association between a higher postoperative CMS and the idiopathic etiology of a frozen shoulder (p = 0.004, ß = 3.971). No intraoperative complications occurred. Postoperatively, four patients (5.1%) were treated with intra-articular steroid injections to manage residual symptoms. One patient (1.3%) with a postoperative frozen shoulder showed persistent symptoms and underwent a new successful arthroscopic capsular release. CONCLUSION: High patient satisfaction and statistically significant ROM and CMS recovery can be achieved after arthroscopic capsular release to manage frozen shoulder. Better functional outcomes are expected when the etiology is idiopathic. Results can help surgeons identify the patients who will most benefit from surgery and should be discussed with the patient. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

A Modified Arthroscopic Outside-in Shoulder Release Approach for Severe Shoulder Stiffness.

OBJECTIVE: Arthroscopic release is effective for patients with shoulder stiffness, but the traditional inside-out procedure cannot effectively alleviate the mobility of some severe stiff shoulder and even cause itrogenic injuries sometimes. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy and advantages of a modified outside-in shoulder release approach for severe shoulder stiffness. METHODS: Included in this retrospective study were 15 patients (five male and 10 female) with severe shoulder stiffness who underwent modified outside-in shoulder release surgery at our hospital between June 2019 and March 2021. Of them, 10 patients had a primary frozen shoulder and five had secondary shoulder stiffness, involving the right shoulder in six cases and the left shoulder in nine cases. The mean age of the 15 patients was 56.7 (34-69) years. The patients were instructed to exercise passively from second-day post-operation and enhance the rehabilitation exercise gradually. All patients received a range of motion (ROM) examination before and after surgery. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon's Score (ASES), Constant Score (CS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score for pain were recorded. All data were tested by normal distribution first and then by paired T test, otherwise by Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 18.2 (12-33) months. Compared with the preoperative value, the mean ASES score at the final follow-up improved from 38.4 ± 7.37 to 88.13 ± 6.33 points; the mean CS score from 43.27 ± 6.71 to 78.74 ± 6.93 points; the mean VAS score from 5.07 ± 1.03 to 0.81 ± 0.83 points; forward flexion from 81.93° ± 11.45° to 156.73° ± 9.12°; abduction from 65.93° ± 16.82° to 144.80° ± 8.83°; neutral external rotation from 13.53° ± 10.38° to 51.20° ± 4.77°; internal rotation from the buttock to waist (L3), all showing a significant difference (P < 0.0001). No serious complication was observed in any patient during the postoperative follow-up periods. CONCLUSION: The present study has demonstrated that the modified arthroscopic outside-in shoulder release approach can improve ROM of patients and alleviate pain effectively, proving it to be an appropriate surgical option for the treatment of severe shoulder stiffness.

Arthroscopic capsular release versus manipulation under anaesthesia for treating frozen shoulder - a prospective randomised study.

PURPOSE: Arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) and Manipulation under anaesthesia(MUA) have been widely used in the treatment of frozen shoulder (FS). However, there is only limited Level-I evidence to prefer ACR over MUA. The purpose of our study was to conduct a randomised trial comparing ACR versus MUA to assess the difference in outcome, complications and cost-effectiveness of both procedures. METHODS: From May 2020 to June 2021, patients presenting with FS were randomised into two groups ACR (n = 44) and MUA (n = 41). Patients with arthritis, full-thickness cuff tears, history of trauma/previous surgery around the shoulder were excluded from the study. Range of movement (ROM), pain grading using visual analogue scale (VAS), functional scores- UCLA, CONSTANT and EuroQol-5D scores were measured pre-operatively and post-operatively. MRI was done at three weeks post-operatively for screening complications of either procedure. Quality-adjusted life years (QALY) was used for cost-analysis. RESULTS: Post-operatively, patients had significant improvement in pain, ROM and functional scores in both groups (P < 0.001) with no significant difference between groups at 24 weeks of follow-up. Diabetic patients undergoing ACR had lesser improvement in abduction and external rotation when compared to non-diabetic patients. Labral tears in MUA group and bone bruises in ACR group were the most common complications noted on the post-operative MRI. For ACR cost per QALY gained was 896 USD while that for MUA was 424 USD. CONCLUSION: Both ACR and MUA resulted in good improvement in pain and shoulder function. Good outcomes, simple technique and better cost-effectiveness would still make MUA an attractive option over ACR for treating FS.

Capsular Healing in Interportal and Periportal Capsulotomy Methods of Hip Arthroscopy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the midterm outcomes and the capsular healing in patients who had interportal capsulotomy versus periportal capsulotomy of hip arthroscopy. METHODS: Retrospectively reviewed 33 patients with labral tear received hip arthroscopy, with an average age of 41 (27-67) years, including 13 cases of Cam deformity and three cases of Pincer deformity. All patients had positive sign of flexion adduction internal rotation or flexion abduction external rotation. With MRI and radiographic (CT, X plain) imageological examination. MRI showed that all patients had labral tear. Radiographic finding (CT, X plain) showed the pathological changes of acetabular and femoral neck osteophyte. One group with 23 patients were treated with periportal capsulotomy. Another group with 10 patients were treated with interportal capsulotomy. All patients did not close the capsule. Clinical outcomes were measured with the Hip Outcome Score Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL) and the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), patient satisfaction measured with visual analogue scale (VAS). The healing of the capsule was evaluated by MRI. MRI showed continuous capsular indicated healing, discontinuous capsular indicated unhealing. Postoperatively 6 months, mHHS and HOS-ADL were obtained. Randomized controlled trials were used in this study for analysis. RESULTS: All patients were followed up with average time of 9.3 months(3-29 months). The postoperative symptoms were obviously relieved, the VAS decreased from (4.9 ± 0.6) to (1.2 ± 0.2) after 3 months postoperative. Follow up 6 months post-operation, patients in the interportal group, the mHHS and HOS-ADL scores improvement were respectively 69.4 ± 9.3 & 70 ± 8.8 pre-operation, and 92.5 ± 5.0 & 86.6 ± 5.4 post-operation (P < 0.05); Patients in the periportal group, the mHHS and HOS-ADL scores improvement were respectively 69.9 ± 15.8, 68.1 ± 15.0 pre-operation, and 90.1 ± 9.3 & 86.7 ± 7.9 post-operation (P < 0.05).The differences were statistically significant. Six months after operation, MRI showed that 23 patients with periportal capsulotomy, the capsule have healed, without other complications. Three of the ten patients with interportal capsulotomy were healed and seven were not. CONCLUSION: Interportal and periportal capsulotomy had good outcomes. The technique of periportal capsulotomy had little damage to the joint capsule. Although the capsule did not close, the capsule healed well in postoperative follow-up. The nonunion rate of the joint capsule was high in the interportal capsulotomy without close the capsule.

Longitudinal Capsulotomy in Hip Arthroscopy: A Safe and Feasible Procedure for Cam-Type Femoracetabular Impingement.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the surgical security, feasibility, and clinical efficacy of the longitudinal outside-in capsulotomy in hip arthroscopic treatment for cam-type femoracetabular impingement (FAI). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with cam-type FAI who underwent hip arthroscopy in our institute from January 2018 to June 2019. All hip arthroscopic procedures were performed by one experienced surgeon in the same manner, except the fashions of capsulotomy. Fifty six patients with mean age of 39.1 and mean body mass index (BMI) of 24.5 were categorized into two groups according to the fashions of capsulotomy. Twenty six cases with longitudinal outside-in capsulotomy were categorized into Group L, and 30 cases with transversal interportal capsulotomy were categorized into Group T as the control group. The demographic parameters were retrieved from medical documents and compared between the two groups. Surgical outcome including overall surgical time, traction time, complications, visual analogue score (VAS), and intraoperative radiation exposure were compared to investigate the security and feasibility. Radiographic assessment, and functional outcome were compared between the two groups to determine the clinical efficacy of the longitudinal capsulotomy. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the demography and duration of follow-up between the two groups. The overall surgical time demonstrated no significant difference between Group L and Group T (130.8 ± 16.6 min and 134.0 ± 14.7 min, P = 0.490). Significantly decreased traction time was found in Group L (43.2 ± 8.4 min and 62.2 ± 8.6 min, P < 0.001) compared to Group T. The Median of the fluoroscopic shot was 1 and 3 (P < 0.001). No major complications and reoperation were reported in both groups. The case of intraoperative iatrogenic injure was 0 (0%) and 6 (20%) in Group L and Group T respectively (P = 0.035), and the case of postoperative neurapraxia was 0 (0%) and 8 (26.6%) in Group L and Group T respectively (P = 0.017). The Median of postoperative VAS was 2 and 3 in Group L Group T (P = 0.002). The postoperative α angle was 42.3° ± 3.4° and 44.4° ± 3.5° in group L and group T respectively (P = 0.001). The postoperative iHOT-12 score at final follow-up was 79.3 ± 6.7 and 77.0 ± 7.9 respectively (P = 0.141). CONCLUSION: Longitudinal outside-in capsulotomy with less radiation exposure, reduced traction time, and reduced complications could be a safe and feasible procedure in arthroscopic treatment for cam FAI. Its clinical efficacy was not worse compared with traditional interportal capsulotomy in short-term follow-up.

Capsular release following total shoulder arthroplasty: an analysis of early outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to analyze the outcomes of open and arthroscopic capsular release following total shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: Over 15 years, 19 patients experienced persistent shoulder stiffness after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty refractory to nonoperative treatment, requiring either open (n = 5) or arthroscopic (n = 14) capsular release. There were seven (39%) patients who had a prior diagnosis of stiffness before the primary arthroplasty. RESULTS: At a follow-up of 2.3 years (1-5.5), there were changes in range of motion, including forward flexion (77°-117°), abduction (49°-98°), external rotation (9°-19°), internal rotation at 0° (Sacrum to L1), and pain (4.1-2.3) scores (p < 0.01). There were seven (37%) patients that required a reoperation following the initial capsular release. The survival-free of reoperation at 2 and 5 years was 76% and 53%, respectively, while the survival-free of revision surgery at 2 and 5 years was 83%. Furthermore, three (16%) patients required a repeat capsular release. Overall, there were 11 (58%) complications, including stiffness (n = 9), infection (n = 1), subscapularis rupture (n = 2), glenoid loosening (n = 3), and pain with weakness requiring reoperation (n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Shoulder stiffness after total shoulder arthroplasty is a very difficult pathology to treat, with high rates of complications and reoperations after capsular release. Overall, in patients that do not develop glenoid loosening, capsular release does improve the patient's pain and shoulder motion. Furthermore, when patients develop stiffness, it is critical to rule out other etiologies, such as glenoid loosening, prior to proceeding with capsular release. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: Retrospective case series.

Arthroscopic capsular release for the treatment of post-stroke frozen shoulder: A protocol for systematic review.

BACKGROUND: This study will assess the efficacy and safety of arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) for the treatment of post-stroke frozen shoulder (PSFS). METHODS: We will carry out a systematic study of randomized controlled trials that assess the efficacy and safety of ACR for PSFS. We will search all potential records for any eligible trials from selected electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, WANGFANG, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure) and grey literature sources from inception to the present. Two authors will independently perform study selection, data extraction, and study quality assessment. Any disagreement will be solved by a third author via consultation. Statistical analysis will be carried out by RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: This study will comprehensively summarize current eligible studies to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of ACR for PSFS. CONCLUSION: This study will provide evidence to determine whether ACR is an effective management for patients with PSFS.

Early Clinical Outcomes of Manipulation under Anesthesia for Refractory Adhesive Capsulitis: Comparison with Arthroscopic Capsular Release.

BACKGROUD: The purpose of this study was to compare early clinical outcomes of manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) and arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) in patients with refractory adhesive capsulitis (AC). METHODS: Thirty AC patients who underwent MUA (MUA group) were included. As a control group, thirty AC patients who underwent ACR (ACR group) were matched for age and sex with the MUA group. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, American shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and range of motion (ROM) were evaluated preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months after procedure. RESULTS: Both groups had significant improvements in the VAS pain score, ASES score, and ROM at 12 months after procedure. VAS pain score and ASES score were significantly better in the MUA group than in the ACR group at 3 months after procedure. Mean forward flexion was significantly greater in the MUA group than in the ACR group at 3 months after procedure. Mean external rotation and internal rotation were significantly greater in the MUA group than in the ACR group at 3, 6, and 12 months after procedure. Two patients required additional steroid injections at 3 and 6 months after MUA because of recurrent stiffness with pain. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with ACR, MUA provided equivalent clinical outcomes in the early period after procedure. Our study suggests that MUA is a useful option to be considered as treatment for refractory AC before choosing ACR.

Anterior elbow release for post-traumatic flexion contractures in patients 21 years or younger.

HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND: An elbow contracture in a young person can be a devastating problem. Significant contractures will lead to functional loss of the extremity. Appropriately performed contracture release can have profound implications on the overall well-being of the patient. The purpose of this study was to report improvements in sagittal-plane range of motion and the complication rate following an anterior elbow release for flexion contractures in patients 21 years or younger. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 27 patients with a median age of 16.8 years who were treated surgically for elbow flexion contracture with an anterior approach. Follow-up was possible in 18 of these patients at an average of 31 months. An anterior approach was performed in all 18 patients, with 4 patients undergoing an additional posterior incision to address posterior structures limiting extension. RESULTS: Elbow extension improved by an average of 35°, from -54° to -19°. The mean total arc of elbow motion improved by 37°, from 65° to 102°. Two complications occurred: traction-related neurapraxia of the lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve and transient neurapraxia of the posterior interosseous nerve. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Elbow contracture release through an anterior approach is an acceptable surgical option. Significant improvement is obtained with a low risk of complications.

Iatrogenic Hip Instability After Hip Arthroscopy: Is There a Role for Open Capsular Reconstruction?: A Case Report.

CASE: A 23-year-old female athlete presented with postoperative hip pain and laxity following 3 arthroscopic hip procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Open reconstruction of the anterior hip capsule with Achilles allograft can correct arthroscopy-induced hip laxity.

Management of Concomitant Preoperative Rotator Cuff Pathology and Adhesive Capsulitis: A Systematic Review of Indications, Treatment Approaches, and Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Concomitant preoperative adhesive capsulitis (AC) and rotator cuff (RC) pathology pose therapeutic challenges in light of contrasting interventional and rehabilitative goals. The purposes of this systematic review were to assess the literature regarding the management and rehabilitation of patients with concomitant RC tears and preoperative AC and to compare overall clinical outcomes between strategies for this common scenario. METHODS: In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, 3 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed) were searched and screened in duplicate using predetermined criteria for studies on the aforementioned patient population. Descriptive statistics are presented. RESULTS: Of 952 studies, 17 involving 662 shoulders, with a mean age of 59.6 ± 3.5 years, 57.9% female patients, and a mean follow-up period of 18.6 months, were included. Capsular release (CR) (86.1%) and manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) (33.1%) were the most common co-interventions with RC repair. Across studies, mean preoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores ranged from 29.0 to 61.3, visual analog scale scores (pain) ranged from 5.3 to 8.0, and Constant scores ranged from 18.0 to 48.0. Mean postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores ranged from 76.9 to 92.0, visual analog scale scores (pain) ranged from 0.3 to 2.5, and Constant scores ranged from 72.6 to 93.2. Postoperative rehabilitation comprised abduction braces and passive range of motion immediately postoperatively for mean durations of 5.0 weeks and 5.3 weeks, respectively, followed by active range of motion at a mean of 5.3 weeks and strengthening at 10.9 weeks. Postoperative complications included stiffness, RC retear, instability, glenoid fracture, and superficial infection. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this systematic review support treatment of patients with degenerative RC tears and concomitant AC with a combination of RC repair and MUA, CR, or both MUA and CR. Regardless of the treatment modality, accelerated postoperative rehabilitative protocols are beneficial in preventing postoperative persistence of AC and can be safely used in this scenario without a substantial increase in complication rates compared with patients undergoing RC repair alone with conservative rehabilitation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, systematic review of Level II, III, IV, and V studies.

Surgical Technique and Anatomical Considerations for the Modified L'Episcopo Tendon Transfer.

BACKGROUND: Birth brachial plexus injury usually affects the upper trunks of the brachial plexus and can cause substantial loss of active shoulder external rotation and abduction. Due to the unbalanced rotational forces acting at the glenohumeral joint, the natural history of the condition involves progressive glenohumeral joint dysplasia with associated upper limb dysfunction. Surgical reconstruction methods have been described previously by Sever and L'Episcopo, and modified by Hoffer and Roper to release the adduction contracture and to restore external rotation and shoulder abduction. METHODS: The authors describe their preferred technique for contracture release and tendon transfer to improve external rotation and shoulder abduction. Pertinent anatomy and highlights of surgical exposure are reviewed. RESULTS: The senior author has utilized this technique with consistent clinical outcomes to improve shoulder function for patients with persisting nerve palsy associated with birth brachial plexus injury. A review of the literature supports utilization of this technique. CONCLUSIONS: Transfer of the latissimus dorsi and teres major to the posterior rotator cuff for reanimation of shoulder abduction and external rotation deficits associated with birth brachial plexus injury is a safe and reliable technique. Careful patient selection and attention to surgical detail are critical for optimal outcomes.

Posterior capsular release is a biomechanically safe procedure to perform in total knee arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: Surgeons may attempt to strip the posterior capsule from its femoral attachment to overcome flexion contracture in total knee arthroplasty (TKA); however, it is unclear if this impacts anterior-posterior (AP) laxity of the implanted knee. The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of posterior capsular release on AP laxity in TKA, and compare this to the restraint from the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL). METHODS: Eight cadaveric knees were mounted in a six degree of freedom testing rig and tested at 0°, 30°, 60° and 90° flexion with ± 150 N AP force, with and without a 710 N axial compressive load. After the native knee was tested, a deep dished cruciate-retaining TKA was implanted and the tests were repeated. The PCL was then cut, followed by releasing the posterior capsule using a curved osteotome. RESULTS: With 0 N axial load applied, cutting the PCL as well as releasing the posterior capsule significantly increased posterior laxity compared to the native knee at all flexion angles, and CR TKA states at 30°, 60° and 90° (p < 0.05). However, no significant increase in laxity was found between cutting the PCL and subsequent PostCap release (n.s.). In anterior drawer, there was a significant increase of 1.4 mm between cutting the PCL and PostCap release at 0°, but not at any other flexion angles (p = 0.021). When a 710 N axial load was applied, there was no significant difference in anterior or posterior translation across the different knee states (n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: Posterior capsular release only caused a small change in AP laxity compared to cutting the PCL and, therefore, may not be considered detrimental to overall AP stability if performed during TKA surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Controlled laboratory study.

Surgical Management of the Posttraumatic Stiff Elbow: A Step-Wise Algorithm for Open Osteocapsular Release.

Posttraumatic elbow stiffness is common with the primary indication for contracture release being limited motion that affects functional activities which has not adequately improved after intensive therapy and rehabilitation. Preoperative evaluation focuses on the history of previous nonoperative and/or operative treatment, physical exam with particular attention paid to the status of the ulnar nerve, and imaging consisting of radiographs and computed tomography. There are multiple intrinsic and extrinsic causes of posttraumatic contracture. In general, limitation of motion in one direction can be attributed to a mechanical block and/or opposing contracture or tightness. Open elbow contracture release has been shown to improve motion, patient health status and disability scores with the specific surgical approach based upon the contracture pathology and surgeon preference. A step-wise algorithm is presented for open osteocapsular release. An anterior and posterior release is performed first through a lateral approach with the addition of a medial approach if ulnar nerve dysfunction exists or inadequate release has been obtained from the lateral approach. A previous posterior incision can be utilized by raising full thickness flaps. After release, gentle manipulation is performed and intraoperative stability is assessed with stress testing under fluoroscopy. Postoperatively, pain is managed with an in-dwelling nerve catheter and rehabilitation commences immediately. Significant improvement in range of motion can be expected with adequate surgical release and postoperative rehabilitation.

Preoperative radiologic predictors of successful soft tissue release surgery for hip subluxation among cerebral palsy patients: A STROBE compliant study.

Paralytic hip subluxation is a common problem in children with cerebral palsy. Although surgical procedures such as soft tissue release and osteotomy have been advocated for its prevention, the exact indications of such procedures remain unclear. We attempted to evaluate preoperative radiographic parameters and identify prognostic factors in children with cerebral palsy. We retrospectively investigated 43 hips in 27 children with cerebral palsy who had undergone soft tissue release surgery for hip subluxation. We evaluated the age at the time of surgery and the radiographic parameters such as the center-edge angle (CEA), the migration percentage (MP), and the acetabular index (AI) at 3 time points: preoperation, 1 year after surgery, and at final follow-up. The outcome measure was determined by the MP value at final follow-up. Student t test was used to compare the quantitative variables between 2 groups (good vs poor outcome). Then the multiple regression analysis was applied to determine the prognostic factors upon soft tissue release surgery. Children with good outcome exhibited higher CEA (average value of -1.43° vs -13.2° in those with poor outcome), lower MP (53.9% vs 71.3%), and lower AI (28.1° vs 35.3°). Upon multiple regression analysis, we found that the age at the time of surgery, preoperative CEA, and preoperative MP did not appear to be independent prognostic factors. The only independent factor that affected prognosis after soft tissue release surgery was the preoperative AI. The preoperative AI values <34° were associated with the good outcome with specificity of 87% and sensitivity of 60% according to the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. These findings indicate that the outcome of soft tissue release surgery can be predicted by the preoperative AI value.

Arthroscopic Elbow Contracture Release in the Pediatric Patient.

BACKGROUND: Elbow contracture is a sequelae of elbow trauma in pediatric patients. Arthroscopic contracture release has been shown to provide equivalent results to open contracture release with less associated morbidity and complications in the adult population. However, open contracture release is still commonly utilized in pediatric patients. The goal of this study is to determine the clinical results and safety profile of arthroscopic elbow contracture release in the pediatric population. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients 18 years of age and younger who underwent arthroscopic elbow contracture release was performed. Demographic statistics, indication for surgery, preoperative and postoperative flexion-extension and pronation-supination range of motion, and all complications were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were identified as having undergone 29 arthroscopic elbow contracture releases. The most common index injury was elbow contracture after radial head fracture. The flexion-extension arc of motion improved from 93.0±39.9 degrees to 128.0±19.2 degrees for a total improvement of 35.2 degrees (P=0.0002), whereas the pronation-supination arc of motion improved from 141.0±58.6 degrees to 153±49.3 degrees for a total improvement of 12.2 degrees (P=0.097). There were 7 total complications. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic elbow contracture release allows for restoration of range of motion with an acceptable safety profile and can be considered as a less invasive alternative to open contracture release in the pediatric population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Effect of nonoperative concomitant intraarticular pathologies on the outcome of arthroscopic capsular release for adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether coexistent intraarticular lesions are negative prognostic factors for the results of arthroscopic capsular release in frozen shoulder patients. METHODS: Seventy-two patients who met inclusion criteria and underwent arthroscopic capsular release between March 2011 and August 2015 for the frozen shoulder were retrospectively evaluated. The patients were divided into two groups according to existence of concomitant intraarticular pathologies detected during arthroscopy. Preoperative and postoperative functional results were assessed with Constant score and shoulder ranges of motion; and the amount of pain was evaluated using visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: Group I consisted of 46 patients (mean age 47.2 years and mean follow-up 26 months) without concomitant shoulder pathologies and group II consisted of 26 patients (mean age 48.6 years and mean follow-up 15 months) with coexistent lesions (SLAP lesions, n = 8; SLAP and partial rupture of the RC, n = 4; SLAP, partial rupture of RC and impingement, n = 10; SLAP and impingement, n = 2; and AC arthritis and impingement, n = 2). Preoperatively, the mean ranges of forward flexion (p = 0.221), abduction (p = 0.065), internal rotation (p = 0.564), Constant (p = 0.148) and VAS (p = 0.365) scores were similar between the groups. After a minimum 12 months of follow-up, all patients significantly improved but no statistically significant difference was detected in the mean ranges of forward flexion (152 vs 150; p = 0.902), abduction (137 vs 129; p = 0.095), external rotation (45 vs 40; p = 0.866), internal rotation (5 vs 5 point; p = 0.474), Constant (82 vs 82.3; p = 0.685) and VAS (1.2 vs 1.2; p = 0.634) scores between the groups. CONCLUSION: The presence of concomitant shoulder pathologies does not appear to affect the clinical outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic capsular release for frozen shoulder. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Therapeutic study.