Arthroscopic Management of Posterior Shoulder Instability.

Posterior shoulder instability is a distinct subcategory of shoulder instability with an incidence higher than previously reported. Pain is typically the primary complaint, with pathology due to repetitive microtrauma being more common that a specific traumatic event. If nonoperative treatment fails, arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair has been shown to result in excellent outcomes and return to sport, with American football players having the best outcomes and throwers being slightly less predictable. Risk factors for surgical failure include decreased glenoid bone width, rotator cuff injury, female gender, and the use of less than 3 anchors.

Location of Shoulder Glenoid Labral Tears: A Study of 1763 Consecutive Patients.

BACKGROUND: Anterior shoulder labral tearing has historically been considered the most common location of shoulder labral pathology. Recently, smaller studies have reported that posterior labral involvement may be more common than previously recognized. PURPOSE: To examine the location of surgically repaired labral tears by a single surgeon over a consecutive 23-year period. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A total of 1763 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic or open shoulder labral repair by a single seniorsports medicine fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeon between April 2000 and April 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to identify patients, which included 29806, 29807, 29822, and 29823. Exclusion criteria included isolated shoulder manipulation or glenohumeral joint or labral debridement that did not include repair. Intraoperative glenoid labral tears observed were categorized into 7 broad categories: (1) anterior labral tears, (2) posterior labral tears, (3) superior labral anterior posterior (SLAP) type II tears (A, B, or C), (4) SLAP type V tears, (5) SLAP type VIII tears, or (6) circumferential labral tears (combined SLAP, anterior, and posterior labral tear). Shoulders diagnosed with multiple tear patterns (ie, anterior and posterior) were also noted. RESULTS: During the 23-year period, 1763 patients underwent arthroscopic or open labral repair; they included 1295 male and 468 female patients, ranging in age from 12 to 70 years, with a mean age of 23.2 years and median age of 19 years. Overall, 28.4% of tears involved the anterior labrum, 64.9% involved the posterior labrum, and 59.6% involved the superior labrum. Regarding isolated tears, 9.3% were isolated anterior labral tears, 19.7% were isolated posterior labral tears, 11.5% involved the anterior and posterior labrum, 22.2% were isolated superior (SLAP type II-IV) tears, 3.63% were isolated SLAP type V tears, 29.8% were isolated SLAP type VIII tears, and 4.1% were circumferential tears. CONCLUSION: Posterior shoulder labral tearing was more common than anterior tearing in a large consecutive series of 1763 patients who underwent surgical repair. This highlights the importance of posterior labral pathology, which sometimes may be overlooked because of more vague complaints, with pain and loss of function being the most common.

Patient Resilience Does Not Conclusively Affect Clinical Outcomes Associated With Arthroscopic Surgery but Substantial Limitations of the Literature Exist.

Purpose: To determine whether low resilience is predictive of worse patient-reported outcomes (PROs) or diminished improvements in clinical outcomes after joint preserving and arthroscopic surgery. Methods: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Science Direct was performed on September 28, 2022, for studies investigating the relationship between resilience and PROs after arthroscopic surgery in accordance with the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Results: Nine articles (level II-IV studies) were included in the final analysis. A total of 887 patients (54% male, average age 45 years) underwent arthroscopic surgery, including general knee (n = 3 studies), ACLR-only knee (n = 1 study), rotator cuff repair (n = 4 studies), and hip (n = 1 study). The Brief Resilience Scale was the most common instrument measuring resilience in 7 of 9 studies (78%). Five of 9 studies (56%) stratified patients based on high, normal, or low resilience cohorts, and these stratification threshold values differed between studies. Only 4 of 9 studies (44%) measured PROs both before and after surgery. Three of 9 studies (33%) reported rates of return to activity, with 2 studies (22%) noting high resilience to be associated with a higher likelihood of return to sport/duty, specifically after knee arthroscopy. However, significant associations between resilience and functional outcomes were not consistently observed, nor was resilience consistently observed to be predictive of subjects' capacity to return to a preinjury level of function. Conclusions: Patient resilience is inconsistently demonstrated to affect clinical outcomes associated with joint preserving and arthroscopic surgery. However, substantial limitations in the existing literature including underpowered sample sizes, lack of standardization in stratifying patients based on pretreatment resilience, and inconsistent collection of PROs throughout the continuum of care, diminish the strength of most conclusions that have been drawn. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of level II-IV studies.

Management of Patellar Tendinopathy.

Patellar tendinopathy is a common pathology typically seen in athletes involved in repetitive explosive jumping and running activities. Also known as jumpers' knee, it is commonly seen in high-level basketball players. Typically, athletes continue to play with symptoms, which can be aggravated and progress to partial patellar tendon tears. When partial patellar tendon tears occur, prolonged recovery and decreased performance is commonly seen. The pathology and treatment can be frustrating for both the athlete and medical provider. Patellar tendinopathy typically does not involve inflammation but rather microinjury to the tendon fibers, which leads to mucoid degeneration, necrosis, and loss of transitional fibrocartilage. When partial tendon tears do occur, the typical location is posteromedially adjacent to the patella. Treatment involves a stepwise approach starting with nonoperative means, including activity modification, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories, and physical therapy focused on eccentrics. Extracorporeal shock wave treatments and injections with platelet-rich plasma or bone marrow aspirate concentrate should be considered, with evolving literature to support their use. Ultrasound percutaneous tendon scrapping with a needle supplemented with the aforementioned injections is an emerging treatment option that the authors have found to be helpful, although further studies are required. Surgical intervention is considered after failure of nonoperative treatments, and typically occurs in tears greater than 50% of the tendon thickness and in tendons with increased thickness (>8.8 mm). Open or arthroscopic debridement can be considered, with no studies showing superior outcomes with either technique; however, no high-quality comparison studies exist. The authors prefer an open technique where, much like a bone-patellar tendon-bone harvest, the unhealthy proximal tendon and bone are excised with then closure of the healthy tendon with absorbable sutures. Suture anchor repair may also be used when necessary. In a recent systematic review, surgical management of patellar tendinopathy has been shown to result in improved patient-reported outcomes with return to sport at high levels.1 Treatment for the difficult and sometimes frustrating pathology of patellar tendinopathy continues to evolve, with biologic and less-invasive ultrasound-based treatments showing promise, and surgical intervention providing reliable outcomes.

Correlation of Acromial Morphology With Risk and Direction of Shoulder Instability: An MRI Study.

BACKGROUND: The influence of bony morphology on the development of posterior shoulder instability is not well known. PURPOSE: To determine if acromial morphology, as measured on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), is associated with posterior or anterior shoulder instability. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: MRI measurements of posterior acromial coverage (PAC), posterior acromial height (PAH), posterior acromial tilt (PAT), and anterior acromial coverage (AAC) were completed for 3 separate matched groups who underwent surgical intervention: posterior instability, anterior instability, and a comparison group of patients who underwent arthroscopic surgery for snapping scapula. Inclusion criteria were patients with recurrent instability <40 years of age without multidirectional instability, glenoid bone loss >13.5%, or glenoid retroversion >10%. RESULTS: Overall, 37 patients were included in each group. PAC was significantly less in the posterior instability group than in the anterior instability and comparison groups (68.3° vs 88.7° vs 81.7°; P < .001). PAH was significantly greater in the posterior group than in the anterior instability group (11.0 mm vs -0.1 mm; P < .001) and comparison group (0.7 mm; P < .001). There was no difference between the posterior and anterior groups in terms of PAT or AAC (P = .45 and P = .05, respectively). PAT was significantly smaller in the posterior instability group than the comparison group (55.2° vs 62.2°; P = .026). The anterior and comparison groups were not significantly different in PAH or PAT (P = .874 and P = .067, respectively) but were significantly different in AAC (P = .026). CONCLUSION: A higher and flatter posterior acromion, as measured on preoperative MRI, appears to be associated with patients who require arthroscopic capsulolabral repair due to posterior shoulder instability. This information may help clinicians to both diagnose and predict the need for operative intervention for patients with posterior labral tears.

Outcomes After Revision Posterior Shoulder Capsulolabral Repair in Adolescent Athletes.

Background: Few studies have evaluated the outcomes of posterior arthroscopic capsulolabral repair in adolescents, especially with regard to outcomes after revision repair. Hypothesis: Adolescent athletes who undergo revision arthroscopic posterior unidirectional capsulolabral repair will have similar outcomes and return to play when compared with adolescent athletes who underwent primary arthroscopic posterior unidirectional capsulolabral repair. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data were reviewed from patients who underwent posterior shoulder stabilization between 2000 and 2019 and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients <11 and >19 years of age and those with multidirectional instability were excluded. Revision surgery was defined as repeat arthroscopic posterior capsular repair. The ability to return to sport (and level of sport), clinical outcomes scores (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES] and visual analog scale for pain), and patient-reported perception of range of motion, strength, and satisfaction were recorded. Comparisons between the primary and revision cohorts were made using the chi-square or the Mann-Whitney U test. Results: Included were 180 adolescent patients (182 shoulders) who underwent a primary unidirectional posterior stabilization, with an average follow-up of 6.1 years. Of these patients, 17 patients required revision surgery (9.3% revision rate). At the final follow-up, patients who underwent revision surgery returned to sport at similar rates to those who did not (70.6% vs 85.9%; P = .095) and were similarly likely to return to their presurgery level of play (41.1% vs 23.7%; P = .10). The no-revision patients had higher ASES scores (76.1 vs 87.1; P = .007) as well as less pain and improved subjective range of motion scores. However, both groups had similar subjective strength scores, and both reported that surgical repair was satisfactory (no revision, 93.2% vs revision, 88.2%; P = .45). Conclusion: Adolescent athletes had a low risk of revision surgery and frequently returned to play after arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair, often at a lower level of play. Those who required revision surgery had poorer outcome scores but still reported a high rate of satisfaction.

Editorial Commentary: Risk Factors of Cyclops Syndrome in Quadriceps Autograft Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: More Helpful Data in Weighing Graft Choice.

Arthrofibrosis after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction can be a devastating complication with risk factors and causes not well established. Cyclops syndrome is a subtype involving localized scar anterior to the graft, which is typically treated with arthroscopic debridement. ACL quadriceps autograft is a newly popular graft option for which clinical data continue to develop. However, recent research shows possible increased risk of arthrofibrosis with quadriceps autograft. Possible causes include inability to achieve active terminal knee extension after extensor mechanism graft harvesting; patient characteristics, including female sex, and social, psychological, musculoskeletal, and hormonal differences; larger graft diameter; concomitant meniscus repair; exposed collagen fibers of the graft abrading the fat pad or tibial tunnel or intercondylar notch; smaller notch size; intra-articular cytokine; and biomechanical stiffness of the graft.

Outcomes of Open Versus Arthroscopic Treatment of HAGL Tears.

BACKGROUND: Lesions that involve humeral avulsions of the glenohumeral ligament (HAGLs), although less common, are primary contributors to recurrent events of dislocation and subluxation of the glenohumeral joint. PURPOSE: To describe the clinical presentation, examination, and surgical outcomes of patients presenting with HAGL lesions who underwent repair using an arthroscopic or open technique. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective review of prospectively collected data was performed of skeletally mature patients without glenohumeral arthritis who presented with HAGL lesions and subsequently underwent arthroscopic or open repair between 2005 and 2017. Independent variables included patient characteristics, clinical presentation, physical examination findings, and arthroscopic findings. Dependent variables included pre- and postoperative Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) score, and range of motion outcomes. RESULTS: Eighteen patients diagnosed with a HAGL lesion who underwent primary arthroscopic repair (n = 7) or open repair (n = 11) were included. There were 17 male patients and 1 female patient with a mean age of 24.9 years (range, 16-38 years). Mean follow-up duration was 50.9 months (range, 24-160 months). Seventeen patients (94.4%) reported pain as the most common symptom, and 7 (38.9%) reported sensation of instability. Scores significantly improved from pre- to postoperative for the arthroscopic and open groups (P < .001): SANE (mean ± SD; arthroscopic, 30.7 ± 15.7 to 92.1 ± 12.2; open, 45.5 ± 8.50 to 90.7 ± 5.24) and WOSI (arthroscopic, 51.4 ± 11.4 to 2.49 ± 3.70; open, 45.5 ± 7.37 to 11.5 ± 5.76). The magnitude of improvement in SANE scores was significantly higher for patients treated arthroscopically (Δ60.0; open, Δ46.5; P = .012). Postoperative WOSI scores were also significantly better in the arthroscopic cohort (2.49 ± 3.70; open, 11.5 ± 5.76; P = .00094). CONCLUSION: Symptomatic HAGL tears present primarily with pain as opposed to instability, necessitating a high index of suspicion for injury. The tears may be treated successfully with an arthroscopic or open technique with significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes and stability.

Minimum 10-Year Clinical Outcomes After Arthroscopic Capsulolabral Repair for Isolated Posterior Shoulder Instability.

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic capsulolabral repair for posterior shoulder instability has been shown to improve patient-reported outcomes and return to sport at short-term and midterm follow-up, but long-term outcomes are unknown. PURPOSE: To determine the objective and subjective clinical outcomes of shoulder function after arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization at a minimum 10-year follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A total of 53 patients (55 shoulders) with unidirectional recurrent posterior shoulder instability who underwent arthroscopic capsulolabral repair were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 15.4 years. Outcomes such as the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score, Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic shoulder and elbow score, and subjective strength, stability, range of motion, and pain were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively at a minimum 10-year follow-up. Outcomes from the same patient cohort were previously collected at 3.0-year follow-up and were evaluated for longitudinal analysis. Subgroup analyses for sport type (contact vs noncontact), position (thrower vs nonthrower), and revision versus nonrevision were performed. Risk factors for revision surgery based on magnetic resonance imaging findings, patient characteristics, and surgical findings were investigated. RESULTS: Arthroscopic capsulolabral repair for posterior shoulder instability led to a statistically significant improvement on all outcome measures, with similar values at short-term (3.0-year) and long-term (15.4-year) follow-up. Across the total population, patients with 19 of 55 shoulders (35%) returned to sport at the same preinjury level, and patients with 33 of 55 shoulders (60%) returned to sport at some level. At long-term follow-up, patients with only 22% of shoulders were involved in the primary sport in which the injury was sustained, with patients with 28% of shoulders discontinuing sporting participation because of ongoing shoulder issues. Throwers trended toward lower Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic scores than nonthrowers both preoperatively (36.5 ± 22.8 vs 48.7 ± 22.9, respectively; P = .10) and postoperatively (57.4 ± 27.0 vs 73.5 ± 26.8, respectively; P = .09) but had similar improvements. Contact and noncontact athletes had similar preoperative and postoperative values, with equal improvements after surgery. With failure defined as revision surgery, an ASES score <60, or a stability value >5, 19 of 55 shoulders (35%) met failure criteria at final follow-up. Overall, 7 of 55 shoulders (13%) underwent revision surgery. At long-term follow-up, patients who underwent revision surgery had worse outcomes than those who did not undergo revision (ASES score: 53.1 ± 25.9 vs 81.8 ± 19.4, respectively; P < .001). An acute injury in the postoperative period (P < .001) and a smaller glenoid bone width on magnetic resonance imaging (P = .02) were the only identified risk factors for revision surgery. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic capsulolabral repair for posterior shoulder instability was a durable treatment option that improved long-term shoulder pain and function and facilitated return to sport in the majority of patients at a mean follow-up of 15.4 years, although a notable proportion of patients met various criteria for failure.

Surgical Management of Patellar Tendinopathy Results in Improved Outcomes and High Rates of Return to Sport: A Systematic Review.

Although the majority of patients with patellar tendinopathy (PT) can be treated nonoperatively, operative management may be indicated for recalcitrant cases. While several surgical techniques have been described, there is limited understanding of postoperative outcomes and expectations regarding return to activity and sport. The purpose of this study was to characterize the clinical outcomes associated with the surgical management of PT with an emphasis on return to sport (RTS) rates. We hypothesized that surgical management would lead to clinically important improvements in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) with high rates of RTS and RTS at the same level. A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Medline, and Embase databases was performed in December 2020. Level of evidence studies I through IV, investigating results of surgical management for PT (PRO, functional outcomes, pain, and/or RTS), were included. The search was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Forty clinical studies reporting on surgery for PT satisfied inclusion criteria, with 1,238 total knees undergoing surgery for PT. A comparison of pre- and postoperative Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment, patellar tendon (VISA-P) scores (mean difference: 41.89, p < 0.00001), Lysholm scores (mean difference: 41.52, p < 0.00001), and visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores (mean difference: 5, p < 0.00001) demonstrated clinically and statistically significant improvements after surgery. The overall RTS rate following operative management was 89.8% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 86.4-92.8, I 2 = 56.5%) with 76.1% (95% CI: 69.7.5-81.9, I 2 = 76.4%) of athletes returning to the same level of activity. Surgery for PT provides meaningful improvement in patient reported outcomes and pain while allowing athletes to RTS at high rates with levels of participation similar to that of preinjury. Comparative studies of open and/or arthroscopic surgery are still limited but current evidence suggests better rates of RTS for arthroscopic surgery compared with open surgery. This is a systematic review of level-I to -IV studies.

Concomitant Glenolabral Articular Disruption (GLAD) Lesion is Not Associated With Inferior Clinical Outcomes After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Shoulder Instability: A Retrospective Comparative Study.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes between anterior shoulder instability patients with and without glenolabral articular disruption (GLAD) lesions after undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair and to evaluate potential risk factors for inferior outcomes and recurrent instability. Methods: Prospectively collected data were retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair with and without GLAD lesions at a minimum of 2 years follow-up. Consecutive patients were matched by age, sex, and number of anchors. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were evaluated before and after surgery, including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand, Short Form-12 score, and satisfaction. Recurrent dislocation, subjective instability, and reoperation were analyzed. Additionally, PROs were assessed on the basis of GLAD lesion characteristics. Results: A total of 54 patients (27 GLAD, 27 control) with a mean age of 28.9 ± 11.6 years were analyzed at mean 4.5 ± 1.9 years (range, 2-9 years) follow-up. Thirty-eight (70.3%) of the participants were male. Patients in both groups experienced significant improvements in all PROs (P ≤ .006 for all measures) and reported high median satisfaction (scale 1-10: 10 vs 10, P = .290) at final follow-up. Two patients in the GLAD cohort and 1 in the control cohort underwent reoperation (P = .588). Four (14.8%) patients in each group reported recurrent dislocation (P = 1.0). Additionally, 2 (7.4%) GLAD patients and 1 (3.7%) control patient reported subjective shoulder instability after surgery (P = 1.0). No significant differences in PROs were observed based on anchor/labral advancement or treatment with microfracture, nor were significant correlations observed between GLAD lesion size and PROs (P > .05 for all). Conclusion: Arthroscopic Bankart repair in patients with GLAD lesions resulted in significantly improved outcomes with high satisfaction, which was no different when compared with those without GLAD lesions. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Management of Complex and Revision Anterior Shoulder Instability.

Treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability has gained significant interest in recent years and involves evaluation of both glenoid and humeral sided bone loss. Decision making is more complex in patients with significant humeral or glenoid bone defects or in those who underwent previous instability surgery. Appropriate assessment of the glenoid track is necessary as "off track" lesions typically require treatments beyond arthroscopic labral repair alone. In those with significant humeral or glenoid sided bone loss, the authors recommend three-dimensional computed tomography in addition to magnetic resonance imaging for accurate evaluation. The Glenoid Track Instability Management Score is a useful guide to help direct treatment by using the glenoid track as well as other known risk factors for recurrence. In circumstances with significant glenoid bone loss, typically over 20%, a coracoid transfer such as the Latarjet is recommended. In patients that previously failed a coracoid transfer, the authors recommend a distal tibia allograft; however, distal clavicle and iliac crest autograft have also been reported to have high success rates. In those with large Hill-Sachs lesions, remplissage or bone grafting are recommended. An estimation of the postoperative glenoid track after glenoid bone augmentation is required for appropriate Hill-Sachs lesion treatment. The authors typically recommend against revision instability surgical treatment with arthroscopic repair alone.

Meniscus Repair Part 1: Biology, Function, Tear Morphology, and Special Considerations.

Knowledge of anatomy and physiology of the meniscus is essential for appropriate treatment. The unique anatomy of the medial and lateral meniscus and blood supply play an important role in decision making. Controversy exists regarding the optimal treatment of meniscal tears including débridement, repair, root repair, and transplantation. The unique tear location and morphology thus plays an essential role in determination of appropriate treatment. Repair is generally advised in tear types with healing potential to preserve meniscal function and joint health.

Comprehensive Arthroscopic Management of Shoulder Arthritis.

Glenohumeral arthritis is a challenging problem, especially in the young, active patient. After nonoperative treatment, including activity modification, anti-inflammatory medications, physical therapy, and injections, is exhausted, surgical treatment ranging from simple debridement to arthroplasty is commonly offered. Given concerns regarding arthroplasty implant longevity, there is an interest in joint-preserving procedures. In this difficult population, the authors recommend a systematic, inclusive approach to the array of pathologies encountered in the setting of early glenohumeral arthritis: the Comprehensive Arthroscopic Management (CAM) procedure. CAM consists of the combination of arthroscopy, glenohumeral chondroplasty, synovectomy, loose body removal, microfracture, capsular release, humeral osteoplasty, axillary nerve neurolysis, subacromial decompression, and biceps tenodesis. Key perioperative care includes the use of regional nerve blocks to allow immediate physical therapy with the goal of restoring range of motion by 4 to 6 weeks with strengthening beginning at 6 to 12 weeks and return to full activities at 4 to 6 months. Although this is still considered a bridging procedure, the literature has reported 92% survival at 1 year, 85% survival at 2 years, 77% survival at 5 years, and 63% survival at 10 years. Predictors of failure of the CAM procedure include joint space <2 mm, flattening of the humeral head, and abnormal posterior glenoid morphology. Patient selection and education is therefore essential for optimizing outcomes.

Outcomes of Arthroscopic Anterior Labroligamentous Periosteal Sleeve Avulsion Lesions: A Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) lesions can occur in recurrent anterior shoulder instability, which may lead to the labrum scarring medially to the glenoid. ALPSA lesions have also been associated with greater preoperative dislocations, larger Hill-Sachs lesions, and greater degrees of glenoid bone loss. Therefore, patients with these lesions have historically had a higher failure rate after repair, with nearly double the recurrent instability rate compared with those undergoing standard arthroscopic Bankart repair. PURPOSE: To compare minimum 2-year outcomes of arthroscopic mobilization and anatomic repair of ALPSA lesions with those after standard arthroscopic Bankart repair. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic repair of ALPSA lesions were matched in a 1-to-3 fashion to patients who underwent standard Bankart repair by age, sex, number of previous ipsilateral shoulder instability surgical procedures, and number of anchors used. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores were compared preoperatively and postoperatively (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES]; 12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12] Physical Component Summary [PCS]; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation [SANE]; shortened version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand; and satisfaction). Recurrent instability, on- versus off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, and reoperation rates were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 100 shoulders (25 ALPSA and 75 Bankart) with an overall mean age of 25.7 years were evaluated. Patients in the ALPSA group demonstrated significant improvements in the ASES (preoperative, 74.8; postoperative, 89.7; P = .041) and SF-12 PCS (preoperative, 46.9; postoperative, 53.4; P = .021) scores but not the SANE score (preoperative, 65.2; postoperative, 75.3; P = .311). Patients in the Bankart group had significant improvements in all outcome scores at final follow-up: ASES (preoperative, 67.1; postoperative, 90.3), SANE (preoperative, 58.0; postoperative, 85.7), and SF-12 PCS (preoperative, 45.3; postoperative, 52.9) (all P < .001). There were no significant differences in PRO scores between the groups preoperatively or postoperatively (P > .05). The median satisfaction for the ALPSA group was 10 of 10 and for the Bankart group it was 9 of 10 (P = .094). There was a significantly higher rate of recurrent dislocation in the ALPSA group (8/25 [32.0%]) compared with the Bankart group (10/75 [13.3%]) (P = .040). Additionally, 5 patients (20.0%) in the ALPSA group underwent revision surgery at a mean of 5.6 years, and 8 patients (10.7%) in the Bankart group underwent revision surgery at a mean of 4.4 years (P = .311). CONCLUSION: Despite improvements in the recognition of and surgical techniques for ALPSA lesions, they still lead to significantly higher postoperative dislocation rates; however, no differences in PRO scores were found. These findings highlight the importance of early surgical interventions in anterior shoulder instability with the hope of lessening recurrent instability and the risk of developing an ALPSA lesion, as well as careful assessment of the quality of soft tissues and other risk factors for recurrence when considering what type of shoulder stabilization procedure to perform.

Meniscus Repair Part 2: Technical Aspects, Biologic Augmentation, Rehabilitation, and Outcomes.

Multiple meniscal repair techniques exist, and successful healing and excellent patient outcomes have been reported with a variety of all-inside and open techniques. Increased awareness and recognition of root tears and meniscocapsular separations are topics of recent interest. The ideal treatment of these injuries remains uncertain, and definitive recommendations regarding their treatment are lacking. Postoperative protocols regarding weight bearing and range of motion are controversial and require future study. The role of biologics in the augmentation of meniscal repair remains unclear but promising. An evidence-based individualized approach for meniscal repair focusing on clinical outcomes and value is essential.

Midterm Outcomes After Hip Labral Augmentation in Revision Hip Arthroscopy.

BACKGROUND: Labral augmentation has emerged as an essential procedure to address a deficient or irreparable labrum while preserving native labral tissue and restoring the hip suction seal mechanism. PURPOSE: To evaluate midterm outcomes of arthroscopic hip labral augmentation for labral insufficiency after previous hip arthroscopy. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Patients were identified from a prospectively collected database who underwent arthroscopic hip labral augmentation between January 2011 and January 2017 with a minimum 3-year follow-up. Pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcome scores were compared and included the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey physical and mental component summaries, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Hip Outcome Score (HOS) (Activities of Daily Living [ADL] and Sport). Postoperative Tegner Activity Scale and patient satisfaction (1-10) scores were also evaluated. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) between the preoperative and minimum 3-year follow-up scores were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 88 patients (39 men, 49 women) underwent revision hip arthroscopy with labral augmentation. The average age was 32.8 ± 11 years. Of these, 77 patients (88%) were available for the minimum 3-year follow-up. The survivorship (absence of conversion to total hip arthroplasty) at 3 years and 5 years was 93% at both time points, with a mean survival time of 8.5 years (95% CI, 8.0-8.9). Eleven patients (14%) required revision arthroscopic surgery for continued pain. Revisions occurred at a mean of 2.6 ± 1.4 years after augmentation. The mean follow-up was 5.2 ± 1.2 years (range, 3-9 years). For patients not requiring subsequent surgery (n = 61), all patient-reported outcome measures significantly improved, which included a 20-point increase in HOS-ADL (MCID, 82%; PASS, 72%) and mHHS (MCID, 78%; PASS, 70%). The median postoperative Tegner score was 4 (range, 1-10). The median postoperative patient satisfaction score was 9 out of 10 (range, 1-10). CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic hip labral augmentation is a successful treatment option for patients with labral insufficiency after previous hip arthroscopy, demonstrating improved patient-reported outcomes and survivorship of 93% at 3 years and 5 years. This technique provides a valuable labral preservation option when addressing hip labral pathology when viable native labral tissue remains.

Outcomes and Survivorship at a Median of 8.9 Years Following Hip Arthroscopy in Adolescents with Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Matched Comparative Study with Adults.

BACKGROUND: Because of the unique theoretical surgical risks, including osteonecrosis, acute iatrogenic slipped capital femoral epiphysis, and epiphyseal injury, the optimal treatment strategy for femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in growing adolescents has yet to be established. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of primary arthroscopic treatment of FAI in growing adolescents with a matched adult group. METHODS: Patients with FAI who underwent arthroscopic treatment with a minimum follow-up of 2 years were included. Patients with previous ipsilateral hip surgery, an Outerbridge grade of ≥3, a preoperative Tönnis grade of ≥2, or evidence of dysplasia (lateral center-edge angle of <25°) were excluded. Eligible patients who were ≤19 years old and whose proximal femoral physis had not yet closed were matched to adult (20 to 40-year-old) counterparts in a 1:1 ratio by sex, body mass index, and time of surgery. For the adolescents, cam resection was performed with a physeal-sparing approach. Outcome scores, including the modified Harris hip score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Living (HOS-ADL), and HOS-Sports-Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), were prospectively collected. RESULTS: Of the 196 eligible adolescents, 157 (80%) were pair-matched to adult controls, with a median postoperative follow-up of 8.9 and 6.6 years, respectively. Fourteen (9%) of the adolescents required revision hip arthroscopy compared with 18 adults (11%) (p = 0.46). No patient in the adolescent group had conversion to a total hip arthroplasty (THA), while 3 in the adult group had a THA (p = 0.25). For adolescents without subsequent hip surgery, the median mHHS improved from 59 preoperatively to 96 postoperatively; the HOS-ADL, from 71 to 98; and the HOS-SSS, from 44 to 94 (p < 0.001), which were significantly higher postoperative scores than those of the matched adults (p < 0.05) despite similar or inferior baseline scores. No complications were found during the office visit or at the final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Hip arthroscopy performed with a physeal-sparing approach for FAI in growing adolescents is safe and effective and yields superior clinical outcomes compared with those in a matched adult group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Shoulder Latarjet Surgery Shows Wide Variation in Reported Indications, Techniques, Perioperative Treatment, and Definition of Outcomes, Complications, and Failure: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To systematically review and compare the surgical indications, technique, perioperative treatment, outcomes measures, and how recurrence of instability was reported and defined after coracoid transfer procedures. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature examining open coracoid transfer outcomes was conducted according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines using the Cochrane registry, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases from 2010 to 2020. Inclusion criteria included open coracoid transfer techniques, including the Bristow or Latarjet technique, full text availability, human studies, and English language. RESULTS: A screen of 1,096 coracoid transfer studies yielded 72 studies, which met inclusion criteria with a total of 4,312 shoulders. One study was a randomized controlled trial, but the majority of them were retrospective. Of those, 65 studies reported on postoperative outcome scores, complication rates, revision rate, and recurrence rates. Forty-three reported on range of motion results. Thirty studies reported on primary coracoid transfer only, 7 on revision only, and 30 on both primary and revision, with 5 not reporting. Average follow-up was 26.9 months (range: 1-316.8 months). Indications for coracoid transfer, technique, perioperative care, complications, and how failure was reported varied greatly among studies. CONCLUSIONS: Latarjet and coracoid transfer surgery varies greatly in its indications, technique, and postoperative care. Further, there is great variation in reporting of complications, as well as recurrence and failure and how it is defined. Although coracoid transfer is a successful treatment with a long history, greater consistency regarding these factors is essential for appropriate patient education and surgeon knowledge. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

Editorial Commentary: Femoroplasty May Not Be Necessary in All Patients With Hip Femoroacetabular Impingement, But Cam Lesions Should Not Be Ignored in Patients With Significant Femoral Head-Neck Offset.

Our knowledge of appropriate arthroscopic management of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) continues to evolve. However, few studies exist evaluating mid- to long-term surgical outcomes to guide optimal treatment. The recent focus has been on the importance of cam femoroplasty in addition to labral treatment; however, studies have shown that correction of the alpha angle to normal does not correlate with patient outcomes. Furthermore, in cases of mixed impingement, an optimal degree of acetabuloplasty as measured by the lateral center-edge angle has not been determined. Few studies have evaluated isolated pincer decompression with omission of cam treatment. In select patients with small or negligible cam lesions who do not have acetabular dysplasia, a small, isolated acetabular rim resection of 1 to 3 mm may provide adequate FAI decompression as well as reduce surgical time and complications. Nonetheless, individualized FAI treatment is necessary that includes a comprehensive 180° femoroplasty in patients with sizable cam lesions to prevent future labral and chondral damage. An intraoperative dynamic examination is important to determine sufficient resolution of FAI. Predictive modeling may play an increasingly important role to ensure appropriate bony resection and to optimize long-term patient outcomes.