Outcomes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in Obese and Overweight Patients: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the mechanism of injury, outcomes, and complications of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction in overweight and obese patients. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and OVID electronic libraries were systematically searched from inception to December, 2017 for any eligible articles using a combination of the phrases "anterior cruciate ligament," "ACL," "overweight," "obese," and "BMI." RESULTS: Studies that evaluated patients with primary ACL reconstruction, classified patients as overweight or obese, and reported a minimum of 1-year follow-up data were included. Eight cohorts from 9 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. There were no significant differences for mechanism of injury, Lysholm scores, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores values, or return to sports with a body mass index (BMI) above or below 25 kg/m. A significant difference was described in International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores when comparing obese patients (BMI >30 kg/m) to patients with BMI <25 kg/m (P <0.01). In patients with BMI >25 kg/m, the risk for arthritis was significantly higher but the risk for revision surgery or contralateral ACL tear was lower (P <0.05). There was no significant difference in complication rates (P = 0.77). CONCLUSION: Patient-reported outcome measures were similar for patients with BMI above and below 25 kg/m, but there is evidence that obese patients have lower IKDC scores. There is a consistent association between overweight status and developing arthritis among patients having an ACL reconstruction. Overweight and obese patients have a lower risk of revision ACL reconstruction and contralateral ACL tear. There is insufficient data to make any conclusions regarding mechanism of injury or complications. More research is needed to better understand what is the appropriate counsel and treatment for overweight or obese patients with ACL tears. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017055594.

Management of symptomatic os acromiale: a survey of the American shoulder and elbow surgeons.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this paper was to survey members of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) to assess their opinion on management options, help highlight important clinical factors, and elucidate surgical preferences for the treatment of a symptomatic meso-os. METHODS: An online questionnaire was distributed to the active members of the ASES. The survey queried surgeon demographics and perioperative management preferences, and presented multiple clinical case scenarios of patients with a presumed symptomatic, unstable os acromiale. RESULTS: There were 116 ASES members who responded to the survey, and 26% (n = 30) who stated they do not operatively manage a symptomatic os. We identified two main clusters of respondents. Cluster 1 (n = 67) (as compared to cluster 2, n = 19) was comprised of surgeons with significantly more experience treating a symptomatic os acromiale (p < 0.05). These surgeons regarded gender, age, BMI, and hand dominance as important clinical factors when deciding when to proceed to surgery. Overall, arthroscopic management of the os was preferred, but those surgeons more experienced in treating os acromiale preferred open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in specific clinical cases. CONCLUSION: The survey findings reflect the current lack of consensus in the treatment of a unstable, symptomatic os acromiale. Overall, arthroscopic management was preferred by most surgeons, though ORIF was preferred in certain clinical scenarios by those more experienced with os acromiale. The overall preference for arthroscopy suggests a possible shift in the treatment paradigm for patients with symptomatic meso-acromions, but higher level studies are needed to substantiate these findings.

Construct Validation of a Novel Hip Fracture Fixation Surgical Simulator.

INTRODUCTION: A surgical simulation platform has been developed to simulate fluoroscopically guided surgical procedures by coupling computer modeling with a force-feedback device as a training tool for orthopaedic resident education in an effort to enhance motor skills and potentially minimize radiation exposure. The objective of this study was to determine whether the simulation platform can distinguish between novice and experienced practitioners of percutaneous pinning of hip fractures. METHODS: Medical students, orthopaedic residents, orthopaedic trauma fellows, and attending surgeons completed in situ hip-pinning simulation that recorded performance measures related to surgical accuracy, time, and use of fluoroscopy. Linear regression models were used to compare the association between performance and practitioner experience. RESULTS: Notable associations were shown between performance and practitioner experience in 10 of the 15 overall measures (P < 0.05) and 9 of 11 surgical accuracy parameters (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: This novel simulation platform can distinguish between novice and experienced practitioners and defines a performance curve for completion of simulated in situ hip pinning. This important first step lays the groundwork for subsequent validation studies, which will seek to demonstrate the efficacy of this simulator in improving clinical performance by trainees completing a sequence of skills-training modules.