3D-MRI versus 3D-CT in the evaluation of glenoid deformity in glenohumeral arthritis using Dixon 3D FLASH sequence.

OBJECTIVE: To compare MRI with 3D reconstructions and 3D-CT with respect to assessment of glenoid wear in osteoarthritic shoulders. METHODS: 3D reconstructions were generated for CT and MR (utilizing the Dixon technique) imaging performed on 29 osteoarthritic shoulders. Two reviewers independently performed glenoid morphometric measurements and evaluated glenoid erosion. Mean differences between the two modalities were calculated. Inter-observer agreement was calculated using kappa coefficient. RESULTS: The combined mean absolute difference (bias) in glenoid version between 3D-CT and 3D-MRI was 2.7° ± 1.6° (range 0.15-7.85, P value = 0.7). The combined mean absolute difference in glenoid inclination between 3D-CT and 3D-MRI was 6.8° ± 4.1° (range 0.8°-15.75°, P value = 0.17). No significant inter-reader variation in glenoid version and inclination measurements on 3D-CT and 3D-MRI was found (P > 0.05). The inter-reader reliability for both CT and MRI was high for Walch grading of glenoid bone loss (κ = 1, κ = 0.81, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: 3D-MRI is comparable to 3D-CT with respect to axial glenoid bone loss, as measured by glenoid version. However, for coronal bone loss estimation, measured by glenoid inclination, 3D-CT remains the gold standard. Thus, 3D-MR can be used as an alternative for preoperative assessment of glenoid version in arthritic shoulders.

Study of variations in inpatient opioid consumption after total shoulder arthroplasty: influence of patient- and surgeon-related factors.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to examine variances in inpatient opioid consumption after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and to determine factors influencing inpatient opioid utilization. METHODS: The sample included patients undergoing elective TSA at a tertiary-level institution between January 2016 and April 2018. Opioid consumption during the inpatient stay was converted into morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs), accounting for dosage and route of administration. The MMEs were calculated per patient encounter and used to calculate mean opioid consumption. Bivariate linear regression analysis was performed to assess the impact of patient-related factors and surgery-related factors on inpatient opioid consumption. RESULTS: Altogether 20 surgeons performed 622 TSAs. The average opioid dose per encounter was 47.4 ± 65.7 MME/d. MMEs prescribed varied significantly among surgeon providers (P < .01). Pre-existing psychiatric disorders (P = .00012), preoperative opioid use (P = .0013), highest quartile of median household income (P = .048), current-smoker status (P < .001), age < 60 years (P < .01), and general anesthesia (vs. regional anesthesia, P = .005) were associated with significant inpatient opioid consumption after TSA. Sex, race, American Society of Anesthesiologists status, replacement type (anatomic TSA vs. reverse TSA), and prior shoulder surgery did not show any significant differences. CONCLUSION: There is considerable variation in inpatient opioid consumption after TSA at the same institution. Knowledge of modifiable and nonmodifiable risk factors that increase inpatient opioid consumption will help to optimize multimodal analgesia protocols for TSA.

Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) and Their Effect on Musculoskeletal Soft-Tissue Healing: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are being increasingly employed as a part of multimodal non-opioid strategies to treat postoperative pain. In the present study, we sought to review the effects of short-term NSAID use on musculoskeletal soft-tissue healing. METHODS: We performed a scoping review of all studies that included the use of NSAIDs and their effect on healing of soft tissues, which for the purpose of this review refers to non-osseous musculoskeletal tissue such as ligament, tendon, labrum, and meniscus. The inclusion criteria encompassed all studies (human, animal, and in vitro) that evaluated the effect of NSAIDs on soft-tissue healing. Subgroup analyses, wherever applicable, were conducted on the basis of the type of NSAID (cyclooxygenase [COX]-specific or nonspecific) and the type of study (human, animal, or in vitro). Relevant metadata from each study were abstracted, and descriptive statistics were used to summarize the results. RESULTS: A total of 44 studies met the inclusion criteria, including 3 human studies, 33 animal studies, and 8 in vitro studies. These studies included 4 different NSAIDs in the human subgroup, 16 different NSAIDs in the animal subgroup, and 7 different NSAIDs in the in vitro subgroup. The majority of reported studies (including 1 of 2 human studies, 10 of 14 animal studies, and 3 of 3 in vitro studies) demonstrated that COX-2-selective inhibitors had negative impact on soft-tissue healing. In contrast, the majority of human and animal studies (2 of 2 and 19 of 30, respectively) demonstrated that nonselective COX inhibitors had no negative effect on the healing of labrum, tendons, and ligaments. The majority of in vitro studies demonstrated that NSAIDs have a harmful effect on biological processes involved in tendon-healing and regeneration (tenocyte proliferation, collagen and glycosaminoglycan synthesis). CONCLUSIONS: Current limited evidence demonstrates that selective COX-2 inhibitors can negatively affect healing of musculoskeletal soft tissue after surgical repair. In contrast, the majority of studies demonstrate that nonselective COX inhibitors have no negative effect on musculoskeletal soft-tissue healing. Additional high-quality human clinical trials are necessary to provide more definitive conclusions.