Biological augmentation of meniscal repair: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Orthopedic literature remains divided on the utility of biologic augmentation to optimize outcomes after isolated meniscal repair. The aim of this systematic review is to analyze the clinical outcomes and re-operation rates of biologically augmented meniscal repairs. METHODS: PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases were queried in October 2020 for published literature on isolated meniscal repair with biological augmentation. Studies were assessed for quality and risk of bias by two appraisal tools. Patient demographics, meniscal tear characteristics, surgical procedure, augmentation type, post-operative rehabilitation, patient reported outcome measures, and length of follow-up were recorded, reviewed, and analyzed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: Of 3794 articles, 18 met inclusion criteria and yielded 537 patients who underwent biologic augmentation of meniscal repair. The biologically augmented repair rates were 5.8-27.0% with PRP augmentation, 0.0-28.5% with fibrin clot augmentation, 0.0-12.9% with marrow stimulation, and 0.0% with stem cell augmentation. One of seven studies showed lower revision rates with augmented meniscal repair compared to standard repair techniques, whereas five of seven found no benefit. Three of ten studies found significant functional improvement of biologically augmented repair versus standard repair techniques and six of ten studies found no difference. There was significant heterogeneity in methods for biologic preparation, delivery, and post-operative rehabilitation protocols. CONCLUSION: Patients reported significant improvements in functional outcomes scores after repair with biological augmentation, though the benefit over standard repair controls is questionable. Revision rates after biologically augmented meniscal repair also appear similar to standard repair techniques. Clinicians should bear this in mind when considering biologic augmentation in the setting of meniscal repair. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Systematic review of prevalence, risk factors, and management of instability following reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Background: Since its approval for use, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has become the primary treatment for cuff tear arthropathy, with indications expanding more recently to include revision fracture, osteoarthritis with significant glenoid bone loss, tumor, and chronic instability. Instability is a well-described postoperative complication, occurring in 1to 31% of relatively small cohorts and case series. Given the relative infrequency of instability, there remains a need for a comprehensive review of instability with a focus on risk factors and management. Our goal of this systematic review is to describe the prevalence, risk factors, and management strategies for instability following RSA. Methods: A systematic review of the PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Inclusion criteria included primary RSA cohorts ≥ 100 patients, revision RSA cohorts of any size, and minimum 1-year follow-up. The primary outcome of interest was postoperative instability. MINORS criteria were used to assess study bias. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed with data reported as ranges. Results: Seventeen studies that included 7885 cases of RSA were reviewed. The mean follow-up ranged from 12 to 84 months. Mean age ranged from 64 to 77 years old, and males represented 19 to 39% of cohorts. There were 204 (2.5%) dislocations in 7885 cases, accounting for a rate of instability from 0.4 to 49% across all studies. By intervention, instability rates ranged from 1 to 5% (primary RSA cases), 1 to 49% (revision RSA cases only), and 0.4 to 10% (mixed cohorts). Subscapularis insufficiency and proximal humerus fractures, and fracture sequelae (malunion and nonunion) were identified as risk factors for instability. Closed reduction and casting and revision RSA were reported as successful treatment strategies with acceptable rates of stable prostheses (28-100% and 55-100%, respectively, across studies). Hemiarthroplasty or resection arthroplasty due to recurrent instability was not uncommon after 2 or more episodes of instability. Conclusion: Instability following RSA occurs infrequently (1-5%) following primary RSA and more commonly following revision RSA (1-49%). RSA for acute proximal humerus fracture and fracture sequelae carries a higher risk of instability. Subscapularis repair appears to be a protective factor. While instability may be successfully treated with closed management or revision RSA, recurrent instability may ultimately require hemiarthroplasty or resection arthroplasty.

Rehabilitation variability after rotator cuff repair.

BACKGROUND: There has been increasing recognition of the importance for standardized postoperative rehabilitation protocols. Despite published guidelines in 2016 by the American Society of Shoulder and Elbow Therapists (ASSET), optimal postoperative rehabilitation after rotator cuff repair (RCR) remains an area of active academic debate. The goals of this study were (1) to assess the variability of RCR rehabilitation protocols published online, (2) to study the congruence between online RCR rehabilitation protocols and the ASSET consensus statement, and (3) to identify differences in online RCR rehabilitation protocols from before and after 2016. METHODS: A web-based search was conducted for publicly available RCR rehabilitation protocols from websites of all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) academic orthopedic institutions. A supplemental 10-page Google search was also performed with the search terms "rotator cuff repair rehabilitation protocol." Collected protocols were grouped by tear size (small/medium or large/massive) and examined for information relating to the following categories: protocol demographics, adjunctive therapy use, immobilization/range of motion, and strengthening. Findings were compared to the ASSET statement's recommendations. Protocols published before and after ASSET's 2016 publication were compared for differences. RESULTS: A total of 66 online RCR rehabilitation protocols were collected. Only 16 of 187 (8.5%) ACGME institutions provided online RCR rehabilitation protocols. The collected protocols recommend more aggressive rehabilitation in comparison to ASSET, specifically regarding immobilization time, passive range of motion initiation, active assisted range of motion initiation, and strengthening initiation (P < .001). Protocols published after 2016 trended toward more conservative recommendations in comparison to protocols published before 2016. Regardless of this trend, the majority of these recommendations were still largely more aggressive than ASSET's recommendations. CONCLUSION: Despite an attempt by ASSET to provide standardization, this study highlights the marked variations that still exist regarding RCR rehabilitation. Additionally, online RCR rehabilitation protocols tend to make more aggressive recommendations than the ASSET consensus statement. Further research is needed to address these variations and to either validate, alter, or reject the ASSET recommendations.

Paget-Schroetter syndrome in athletes: a comprehensive and systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Paget-Schroetter syndrome (PSS) is a rare condition of axillosubclavian vein thrombosis often seen in athletes with a history of repetitive external rotation and abduction of the shoulder. The purpose of this review was to analyze the literature and characterize PSS in the athletic population, including risk of PSS by sport. We also provide a comprehensive review of PSS to inform clinicians on the pathophysiology, detection, and management of the condition. METHODS: Four databases were reviewed to identify cases of PSS occurring in athletes. Data on patient demographics, reported sport, diagnosis, treatment, management, return to sport, and complications were extracted and analyzed by 2 independent reviewers. RESULTS: Of the 123 cases of PSS identified, baseball and weight lifting had the highest incidence (26.8% and 19%, respectively), followed by swimming, football, and basketball. The average return to sport was 4.7 months, and 26.7% of subjects reported complications, most commonly pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSION: In athletes presenting with upper extremity pain and swelling with a history of playing baseball or weight lifting, PSS should be higher on a clinicians differential diagnosis list. Swimmers, football, and basketball players are less likely to present with PSS but are still more likely than other types of athletes to develop the condition. Clinician awareness of PSS in athletes is critical to avoid delays in treatment and misdiagnosis, and to allow for a timely return to sport with minimal complications.