Analysis of the reasons why patients cancel shoulder surgery despite recommendation.

BACKGROUND: To determine the reasons and factors that contribute to the cancellations of shoulder surgeries at a tertiary referral center and to analyze the characteristics of these patients. METHODS: Patients scheduled for shoulder surgery from June 2017 to July 2019 were allocated to a surgery group (n=224) or a cancellation group (n=96). These groups were compared with respect to patient characteristics, types of surgery, distance from patient's home to the hospital, traveling time to the hospital, and waiting period before surgery. Reasons for cancellation and responses were acquired using a telephone interview and were subsequently analyzed. RESULTS: The cancellation group was older, had a less frequent history of trauma, and had a lower proportion of patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair than the surgery group (p=0.009, p=0.014, and p=0.017, respectively). In addition, mean distance from the patients' homes to the hospital and preoperative waiting time were both longer in the cancellation group (p=0.001 and p<0.01, respectively). The most common reason given for cancellation was another medical condition (28.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Older age, need for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery, longer distance from the patient's home to the hospital, and longer waiting period significantly increased the chance of cancellation. The main reason for canceling surgery was a concurrent medical condition. Therefore, identification of other medical conditions in advance is an important consideration when surgeons recommend shoulder surgery to patients. Surgeons should also consider patient's age, type of surgery, distance from the hospital, and waiting time when assessing the possibility of surgery cancellation.

Novel and reproducible technique coping with intraoperative anchor pullout during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the incidence of intraoperative anchor pullout during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, to compare the outcomes of different methods of managing anchor pullout, and to introduce a new technique for anchor pullout. METHODS: 1076 patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using a single-row repair technique were included. In 483 patients, rotator cuff repair was performed using a screw-in type anchor, and in 593 patients, soft anchors were used. When intraoperative anchor pullout occurred, it was managed by buddy screwing, anchor insertion in a different location, cement augmentation, or by bar anchoring using a threaded Steinmann pin. Plain radiography and sonography were used to check anchor locations and healing. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients experienced anchor pullout intra- or postoperatively (48 and four patients, respectively). Anchor pullouts were more frequently observed for larger tears, women, older patients, and in patients with preoperative stiffness (limitations of both active and passive movements of the affected shoulder joint). For screw-in type anchors, pullout during surgery occurred in 16 patients (3.3%, 16/483), and all were managed using the buddy screwing technique. For soft anchor cases, pullout occurred in 32 patients (5.4%, 32/593) and was managed by anchor insertion in a different location (17 patients), cement augmentation (two patients), or bar anchoring using a threaded Steinmann pin (13 patients). Three patients managed by buddy screwing and two patients managed by anchor insertion in a different location had anchor failure after repair. Tendon healing at 6 months was observed in 12/16 patients treated by buddy screwing, 11/17 treated by anchor insertion in a different location, 2/2 treated by cement augmentation, and 12/13 treated by bar anchoring with a threaded Steinmann pin. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative anchor pullout during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair is an uncommon but cumbersome complication. There are some techniques already introduced to deal with this complication. In comparison, not one technique is overwhelmingly superior to others; however, our new technique which is bar anchoring with a threaded Steinmann pin could be another solution, since it could utilize primary anchor sites and results appear to be acceptable. Level of evidence III.

Surgical Options for Failed Rotator Cuff Repair, except Arthroplasty: Review of Current Methods.

Although the prevalence of rotator cuff tears is dependent on the size, 11% to 94% of patients experience retear or healing failure after rotator cuff repair. Treatment of patients with failed rotator cuff repair ranges widely, from conservative treatment to arthroplasty. This review article attempts to summarize the most recent and relevant surgical options for failed rotator cuff repair patients, and the outcomes of each treatment, except arthroplasty.

Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Tenotomy versus Subpectoral Tenodesis in Rotator Cuff Repair.

BACKGROUD: Lesions of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) are one of the most common pathologies in patients with a rotator cuff tear. Although various procedures have been shown to be effective for treating LHBT lesions during rotator cuff repair, no consensus has been reached regarding the most effective treatment. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of tenotomy vs subpectoral tenodesis of the LHBT in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. METHODS: The records of 135 patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with biceps tenotomy or subpectoral tenodesis for a partial LHBT tear of > 50% were initially reviewed. Finally, 77 patients (38 patients with tenotomy and 39 patients with subpectoral tenodesis) with an intact rotator cuff, who underwent a functional evaluation at 1 year postoperatively, were enrolled in this retrospective study. RESULTS: The average follow-up was 13.3 ± 4.36 months (13.2 ± 1.4 months in the tenotomy group and 13.6 ± 2.7 months in the subpectoral tenodesis group; p = 0.416). Demographic and surgical data were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Preoperatively, biceps groove tenderness, Speed's test, and Yergason test results were positive in 27.3%, 27.3%, and 10.4% of the study subjects, respectively. Compared with preoperative values, all functional scores including shoulder muscle power were significantly improved postoperatively, and no significant intergroup difference was observed (all p > 0.05). A visible Popeye deformity was not encountered in either group at the final follow-up. Eight patients in the tenotomy group and 7 patients in the subpectoral tenodesis group complained of mild anterior shoulder pain (p = 0.731), and 4 patients in each group complained of groove tenderness (p = 0.969). No surgical or postoperative complication occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Both biceps tenotomy and subpectoral tenodesis performed during rotator cuff repair improved pain and function and resulted in comparable clinical outcomes. Residual symptoms associated with the remnant LHBT in the groove may not be a problem after adhesion of LHBT.

Effects of a Thermosensitive Antiadhesive Agent on Single-Row Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative stiffness after rotator cuff repair is a common complication that can lead to poor outcomes and patient discomfort. The application of an antiadhesive agent at the time of repair recently became an option for clinicians, but little information is available on its effects. PURPOSE: To evaluate and compare retear rates, the incidence of postoperative stiffness, and the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent cuff repair with or without the application of an antiadhesive agent. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Among 296 patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery, we compared the outcomes of those injected with a thermosensitive gel antiadhesive agent into the subacromial space (112 cases) versus noninjected controls (184 cases). Retear rates in the 2 groups were determined by magnetic resonance imaging at 1 year after surgery. Shoulder joint range of motion and functional scores were evaluated serially. RESULTS: The rate of retear was significantly lower in the injection group (20/112 cases; 17.9%) than the control group (53/184 cases; 28.8%) (P = .034). Postoperative stiffness was not significantly different between the 2 groups (P = .710). Among the data regarding range of motion, only forward flexion at 6 months after surgery showed superior results in the injection group. Functional scores showed conflicting results: The control group had better visual analog scale scores for pain (injection vs control: 2.17 vs 1.68 at 6 months; 1.82 vs 1.28 at 12 months), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores (79.89 vs 89.64 at 12 months), and simple shoulder test scores (8.70 vs 10.06 at 12 months), whereas the injection group had better Constant-Murley scores (injection vs control: 59.49 vs 55.60 at 3 months; 77.35 vs 71.98 at 6 months; 87.28 vs 81.56 at 12 months). CONCLUSION: The tendon healing rate was significantly higher in the group receiving an antiadhesive agent than in the control group. No intergroup difference was seen in the occurrence of postoperative stiffness. However, the pain-related functional score showed inferior results in the injection group at 12 months. The biological action of antiadhesive agents in rotator cuff repair should be further evaluated.

Focusing X-ray free-electron laser pulses using Kirkpatrick-Baez mirrors at the NCI hutch of the PAL-XFEL.

The Pohang Accelerator Laboratory X-ray Free-Electron Laser (PAL-XFEL) is a recently commissioned X-ray free-electron laser (XFEL) facility that provides intense ultrashort X-ray pulses based on the self-amplified spontaneous emission process. The nano-crystallography and coherent imaging (NCI) hutch with forward-scattering geometry is located at the hard X-ray beamline of the PAL-XFEL and provides opportunities to perform serial femtosecond crystallography and coherent X-ray diffraction imaging. To produce intense high-density XFEL pulses at the interaction positions between the X-rays and various samples, a microfocusing Kirkpatrick-Baez (KB) mirror system that includes an ultra-precision manipulator has been developed. In this paper, the design of a KB mirror system that focuses the hard XFEL beam onto a fixed sample point of the NCI hutch, which is positioned along the hard XFEL beamline, is described. The focusing system produces a two-dimensional focusing beam at approximately 2 µm scale across the 2-11 keV photon energy range. XFEL pulses of 9.7 keV energy were successfully focused onto an area of size 1.94 µm × 2.08 µm FWHM.

Healing disturbance with suture bridge configuration repair in rabbit rotator cuff tear.

BACKGROUND: Medial row failure has been reported in the suture bridge technique of rotator cuff repair. This study compared the healing response of suture bridge configuration repair (SBCR) and parallel type transosseous repair (PTR). METHODS: Acute rotator cuff repair was performed in 32 rabbits. Both shoulders were repaired using PTR or SBCR. In PTR, simple PTR was performed through 2 parallel transosseous tunnels created using a microdrill. In SBCR, 2 additional crisscross transosseous tunnels were added to mimic arthroscopic SBCR. At 1, 2, and 5 weeks postoperatively, comparative biomechanical testing was performed in 8 rabbits, and histologic analysis, including immunohistochemical staining for CD31, was performed in 4 rabbits. RESULTS: Failure loads at 1 week (38.12 ± 20.43 N vs 52.00 ± 27.23 N; P = .284) and 5 weeks (97.93 ± 48.35 N vs 119.60 ± 60.81 N; P = .218) were not statistically different between the SBCR and PTR groups, respectively, but were significantly lower in the SBCR group than in the PTR group (23.56 ± 13.56 N vs. 44.25 ± 12.53 N; P = .009), respectively, at 2 weeks. Markedly greater fibrinoid deposition was observed in the SBCR group than in the PTR group at 2 weeks. For vascularization, there was a tendency that more vessels could be observed in PTR than in SBCR at 2 weeks (15.9 vs 5.6, P = .068). CONCLUSIONS: In a rabbit acute rotator cuff repair model, SBCR exhibited inferior mechanical strength, and fewer blood vessels were observed at the healing site at 2 weeks postoperatively. Medial row tendon failure was more common in SBCR. Surgeons should consider the clinical effect of SBCR when performing rotator cuff repair.

Prediction of postoperative pain intensity after lumbar spinal surgery using pain sensitivity and preoperative back pain severity.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the role of preoperative pain sensitivity and preoperative symptom severity for prediction of postoperative pain intensity after lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: This study consisted of two groups who underwent decompression surgery alone (62 patients) or decompression with fusion surgery (37 patients) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Pain Sensitivity Questionnaire (PSQ) and visual analog pain scale (VAS) for back pain and leg pain were collected preoperatively with detailed medical history. The assessment was performed immediately after surgery when the patients had completely recovered and regained their complete consciousness from general anesthesia (H0) and subsequently 4, 8, 18, 30, 48, and 72 hours (H4, H8, H18, H30, H48, and H72) thereafter as they recovered. RESULTS: Both groups showed a decrease in back pain and leg pain with the time postoperatively. In fusion group, preoperative VAS for back pain was significantly correlated with postoperative VAS for back pain at H0, H4, H8, and H18, and PSQ minor/total PSQ also showed a significant correlation with postoperative back pain at H48 and H72. In contrast, only total PSQ and PSQ minors were significantly correlated with postoperative back pain at H18 and H30 in decompression group. Hierarchical regression analysis finally showed that each preoperative back pain and PSQ minor was predictive of immediate postoperative back pain (from H0 to H18) in fusion group and delayed postoperative back pain (H18, H30) in decompression group. CONCLUSIONS: The study highlights that each preoperative back pain and individual pain sensitivity could predict the different aspects of postoperative pain after lumbar surgery.

Biomechanical analysis of fusion segment rigidity upon stress at both the fusion and adjacent segments: a comparison between unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of unilateral pedicle screw fixation on the fusion segment and the superior adjacent segment after one segment lumbar fusion using validated finite element models. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four L3-4 fusion models were simulated according to the extent of decompression and the method of pedicle screws fixation in L3-4 lumbar fusion. These models included hemi-laminectomy with bilateral pedicle screw fixation in the L3-4 segment (BF-HL model), total laminectomy with bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BF-TL model), hemi-laminectomy with unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UF-HL model), and total laminectomy with unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UF-TL model). In each scenario, intradiscal pressures, annulus stress, and range of motion at the L2-3 and L3-4 segments were analyzed under flexion, extension, lateral bending, and torsional moments. RESULTS: Under four pure moments, the unilateral fixation leads to a reduction in increment of range of motion at the adjacent segment, but larger motions were noted at the fusion segment (L3-4) in the unilateral fixation (UF-HL and UF-TL) models when compared to bilateral fixation. The maximal von Mises stress showed similar patterns to range of motion at both superior adjacent L2-3 segments and fusion segment. CONCLUSION: The current study suggests that unilateral pedicle screw fixation seems to be unable to afford sufficient biomechanical stability in case of bilateral total laminectomy. Conversely, in the case of hemi-laminectomy, unilateral fixation could be an alternative option, which also has potential benefit to reduce the stress of the adjacent segment.

Vesicular monoamine transporter 2 and dopamine transporter are molecular targets of Pitx3 in the ventral midbrain dopamine neurons.

Midbrain dopamine (mDA) neurons play critical roles in the regulation of voluntary movement and their dysfunction is associated with Parkinson's disease. Pitx3 has been implicated in the proper development of mDA neurons in the substantia nigra pars compacta, which are selectively lost in Parkinson's disease. However, the basic mechanisms underlying its role in mDA neuron development and/or survival are poorly understood. Toward this goal, we sought to identify downstream target genes of Pitx3 by comparing gene expression profiles in mDA neurons of wild-type and Pitx3-deficient aphakia mice. This global gene expression analysis revealed many potential target genes of Pitx3; in particular, the expression of vesicular monoamine transporter 2 and dopamine transporter, responsible for dopamine storage and reuptake, respectively, is greatly reduced in mDA neurons by Pitx3 ablation. In addition, gain-of-function analyses and chromatin immunoprecipitation strongly indicate that Pitx3 may directly activate transcription of vesicular monoamine transporter 2 and dopamine transporter genes, critically contributing to neurotransmission and/or survival of mDA neurons. As the two genes have been known to be regulated by Nurr1, another key dopaminergic transcription factor, we propose that Pitx3 and Nurr1 may coordinately regulate mDA specification and survival, at least in part, through a merging and overlapping downstream pathway.