What Happens to Youth Baseball Players Diagnosed With Little League Shoulder and Little League Elbow Syndrome?

BACKGROUND: The long-term prognosis of baseball and softball players diagnosed with Little League elbow (LLE) and Little League shoulder (LLS) is unknown. Many of these athletes are potentially at risk of developing future shoulder and elbow injuries that may require surgical intervention. This study's purpose is to retrospectively assess 5-year patient-reported outcomes and career progression of a series of youth baseball and softball players diagnosed with LLE and LLS. METHODS: This institutional review board-approved, single-center, retrospective study evaluated 5-year outcomes of a cohort of youth baseball and softball players diagnosed with LLE and LLS between 2013 and 2017. Demographic and clinical data was recorded including age, gender, primary position, and months played per year. A standardized phone survey was obtained approximately 5 years post-treatment to assess upper extremity function, career progression, and pain recurrence. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients (44 LLE, 17 LLS) met the inclusion criteria and participated in a standardized phone survey. The mean age at the time of diagnosis was 13.2 years and all but one of the athletes were male. On average, about 80% (34/44 LLE, 15/17 LLS) played baseball 9 months or more per year. After diagnosis and nonoperative management, more than 80% (37/44 LLE, 14/17 LLS) were able to return to competition, but up to 40% of players changed positions (9/44 LLE, 7/17 LLS). Five years later, less than half (21/44 LLE, 8/17 LLS) were playing baseball actively. The recurrence rate was >20% (9/42 LLE, 6/17 LLS) with a mean time of recurrence of 8.8 months. Patients who experienced symptom recurrence were less likely to play baseball 5 years later and had lower patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: A diagnosis of LLE and LLS in early adolescence can be a setback for a young athlete. Fortunately, most athletes will be able to return to competition with ∼50% still competing at 5 years. Very few will progress to future arm surgery, but recurrence rates are relatively high, and these athletes are less likely to participate in their sport 5 years later. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV-Retrospective cohort study.

Defining the Incidence of Residual Acetabular Dysplasia After Successful Reduction With a Harness.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rate of residual acetabular dysplasia (RAD), defined as an acetabular index (AI) of >90th percentile of age and sex-matched controls, in a cohort of infants successfully treated with the Pavlik harness (PH). METHODS: We retrospectively studied typically developing infants at a single center, with at least 1 dislocated hip, that was successfully treated with a PH and had a minimum of 48 months follow-up. Hip dislocation was defined as <30% femoral head coverage at rest on pretreatment ultrasound or IHDI grade 3 or 4 on the pretreatment radiograph. RESULTS: Forty-six dislocated hips (41 infants) were studied (4 males and 37 females). Brace treatment was initiated at an average age of 1.8 months (range: 2 d to 9.3 mo) and was maintained for an average of 10.2 months (range: 2.3 to 24.9 mo). All hips achieved IHDI grade 1 reduction. Five of 46 hips (11%) had an AI >90th percentile at the conclusion of bracing. Average follow-up was 6.5 years (range: 4.0 to 15.2 y). We found a 30% incidence of RAD (14/46 hips) on final follow-up radiographs. Of these hips, 13/14 (93%) had AI <90th percentile at the end of brace treatment. Comparing children with and without RAD, there were no differences in age at the initial visit or brace initiation, total follow-up, femoral head coverage at the initial visit, alpha angle at the initial visit, or total time in the brace ( P > 0.09). CONCLUSION: In a single-center cohort of infants with dislocated hips treated successfully with a PH, we observed a 30% incidence of RAD at a minimum 4.0-year follow-up. Normal acetabular morphology at the end of brace treatment did not result in normal acetabular morphology at the final follow-up in 13/41 hips (32%). We recommend that surgeons should pay close attention to the year-over-year change in both the AI and AI percentile. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV: case series.

Cost-Effectiveness of Bariatric Surgery Prior to Posterior Lumbar Decompression and Fusion in an Obese Population with Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.

STUDY DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis. OBJECTIVE: To determine if bariatric surgery prior to posterior lumbar decompression and fusion (PLDF) for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) is a cost-effective strategy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Obesity poses significant perioperative challenges for DS. Treated operatively, obese patients achieve worse outcomes relative to non-obese peers. Concomitantly, they fare better with surgery than with nonoperative measures. These competing facts create uncertainty in determining optimal treatment algorithms for obese patients with DS. The role of bariatric surgery merits investigation as a potentially cost-effective optimization strategy prior to PLDF. METHODS: We simulated a Markov model with two cohorts of obese individuals with DS. 10,000 patients with body mass index (BMI) more than or equal to 30 in both arms were candidates for both bariatric surgery and PLDF. Subjects were assigned either to (1) no weight loss intervention with immediate operative or nonoperative management ("traditional arm") or (2) bariatric surgery 2 years prior to entering the same management options ("combined protocol").Published costs, utilities, and transition probabilities from the literature were applied. A willingness to pay threshold of $100,000/QALY was used. Sensitivity analyses were run for all variables to assess the robustness of the model. RESULTS: Over a 10-year horizon, the combined protocol was dominant ($13,500 cheaper, 1.15 QALY more effective). Changes in utilities of operative and nonoperative treatments in non-obese patients, the obesity cost-multiplier, cost of bariatric surgery, and the probability of success of nonoperative treatment in obese patients led to decision changes. However, all thresholds occurred outside published bounds for these variables. CONCLUSION: The combined protocol was less costly and more effective than the traditional protocol. Results were robust with thresholds occurring outside published ranges. Bariatric surgery is a viable, cost-effective preoperative strategy in obese patients considering elective PLDF for DS.Level of Evidence: 3.

Advanced Imaging Adds Little Value in the Diagnosis of Femoroacetabular Impingement Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) syndrome is an increasingly recognized source of hip pain and disability in young active adults. In order to confirm the diagnosis, providers often supplement physical examination maneuvers and radiographs with intra-articular hip injection, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA). Since diagnostic imaging represents the fastest rising cost segment in U.S. health care, there is a need for value-driven diagnostic algorithms. The purpose of this study was to identify cost-effective diagnostic strategies for symptomatic FAI, comparing history and physical examination (H&P) alone (utilizing only radiographic imaging) with supplementation with injection, MRI, or MRA. METHODS: A simple-chain decision model run as a cost-utility analysis was constructed to assess the diagnostic value of the MRI, MRA, and injection that are added to the H&P and radiographs in diagnosing symptomatic FAI. Strategies were compared using the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) with a willingness to pay (WTP) of $100,000/QALY (quality-adjusted life year). Direct costs were measured using the Humana database (PearlDiver). Diagnostic test accuracy, treatment outcome probabilities, and utilities were extracted from the literature. RESULTS: H&P with and without supplemental diagnostic injection was the most cost-effective. Adjunct injection was preferred in situations with a WTP of >$60,000/QALY, low examination sensitivity, and high FAI prevalence. With low disease prevalence and low examination sensitivity, as may occur in a general practitioner's office, H&P with injection was the most cost-effective strategy, whereas in the reciprocal scenario, H&P with injection was only favored at exceptionally high WTP (∼$990,000). CONCLUSIONS: H&P and radiographs with supplemental diagnostic injection are preferred over advanced imaging, even with reasonable deviations from published values of disease prevalence, test sensitivity, and test specificity. Providers with low examination sensitivity in situations with low disease prevalence may benefit most from including injection in their diagnostic strategy. Providers with high examination sensitivity in situations with high disease prevalence may not benefit from including injection in their diagnostic strategy. Providers should not routinely rely on advanced imaging to diagnose FAI syndrome, although advanced imaging may have a role in challenging clinical scenarios. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and Decision Analysis Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.