Editorial Commentary: Subacromial Balloon Spacer Is an Alternative to Rotator Cuff Repair in Older, Lower-Demand Patients Who Prioritize Pain Relief and Faster Recovery Over Strength Restoration.

The subacromial balloon spacer was originally designed to treat massive irreparable rotator cuff tears in patients with pain but preserved function, and favorable results have been reported. However, surgeons have expanded its application to include use as an adjunct for salvage procedures such as superior capsular reconstruction and tendon transfer, as a delivery device for steroids or biologics, and as an augmentation in the setting of primary or revision rotator cuff tear. When adapting technology to new techniques, one must ask, What is the basis by which we can expect success? In rotator cuff repair, the technology of anchor, suture, and repair configurations is such that mechanical failure is rare. Failure occurs because of lack of biological healing. It is hard to imagine how the balloon may improve biology. In addition, an intact tendon is not required for acceptable patient function or pain relief. The balloon spacer is an alternative to repair in properly selected older, lower-demand patients who prioritize pain relief over strength restoration in exchange for faster recovery.

Editorial Commentary: Subacromial Balloon Spacer for Management of Massive Irreparable Posterosuperior Rotator Cuff Tears Improves Shoulder Range of Motion and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

Considerable controversy exists regarding the management of massive posterosuperior rotator cuff tears. This conversation has been invigorated further by the emergence of the subacromial balloon spacer for management of patients with tear patterns deemed irreparable. Most data lend support to the balloon spacer improving shoulder range of motion and patient-reported outcome measures, with a simplified technique and accelerated patient recovery. Biomechanical data support both decreased contact pressure in the subacromial space and humeral re-centering. Patient indications are increasingly being defined and include lower-demand patients who prioritize pain relief over strength recovery and have maintained active elevation, absence of glenohumeral arthritis, and an intact subscapularis. The subacromial balloon spacer has shown largely positive results at mid-term follow-up. Further data are still needed to determine long-term outcomes and the impact on future revision surgery or conversion to reverse arthroplasty, as well as expanded indications such as large tears that are mechanically repairable but carry a substantial risk of failure of healing. For now, so far, so good.

Balloon Spacer Implant is an "Intermediate Value" Innovation Relative to Partial Repair for Full-Thickness Massive Rotator Cuff Repairs: A Cost-Utility Analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cost-utility of a Balloon Spacer implant relative to partial repair (PR) for the surgical treatment of full-thickness massive rotator cuff tears (MRCT). METHODS: A decision-analytic model comparing Balloon Spacer versus PR was developed using data from a prospective, randomized, single-blinded, multi-center controlled trial of 184 randomized patients. Our model was constructed based on the various event pathways a patient could have after the procedure. The probability that each patient progressed to a given outcome and the quality-adjusted life years (QALY) associated with each outcome were derived from the clinical trial data. Incremental cost utility ratio (ICUR) and incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) were calculated based on a probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulations of 1,000 hypothetical patients progressing through the decision-analytic model. One-way sensitivity and threshold analyses were performed by varying cost, event probability, and QALY estimates. RESULTS: Balloon Spacer had an ICUR of $106,851 (95% CI, $96,317 to $119,143) relative to PR for surgical treatment of MRCT. Across all patients, Balloon Spacer was associated with greater 2-year QALY gain compared to PR (0.20 ± 0.02 for Balloon Spacer versus 0.18 ± 0.02 for PR), but with substantially higher total 2-year cost ($9,701 ± $939 for Balloon Spacer versus $6,315 ± $627 for PR). PR was associated with a positive INMB of $1,802 (95% CI, $1,653 to $1,951) over Balloon Spacer at the $50,000/QALY willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to PR, Balloon Spacer is an "intermediate value" innovation for treatment of MRCT over a 2-year postoperative period with an ICUR value that falls within the $50,000 to $150,000 WTP threshold.

Blood Flow Restriction Enhances Recovery After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating neuromuscular and clinical outcomes of blood flow restriction (BFR) training after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) compared to non-BFR rehabilitation protocols. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses guidelines by querying PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, the Cochrane Database for Systematic Review, and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials databases from inception through December 2023 to identify Level I-II RCTs evaluating outcomes of BFR training after ACLR compared to non-BFR rehabilitation. A meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models with standardized mean difference (SMD) for pain, muscle strength, and muscle volume, while mean difference (MD) was calculated for patient-reported outcome measures. RESULTS: Eight RCTs, consisting of 245 patients, met inclusion criteria, with 115 patients undergoing non-BFR rehabilitation versus 130 patients undergoing BFR after ACLR. Mean patient age was 27.2 ± 6.7 years, with the majority of patients being male (63.3%, n=138/218). The length of the BFR rehabilitation protocol was most commonly between 8-12 weeks (range, 14 days - 16 weeks). The majority of studies set the limb/arterial occlusion pressure in the BFR group at 80%. When compared to non-BFR rehabilitation, BFR resulted in significant improvement in isokinetic muscle strength (SMD: 0.77, p=0.02, I2: 58%), IKDC score (MD: 10.97, p=<.00001, I2: 77%), and pain (SMD: 1.52, p=.04, I2: 87%), but not quadriceps muscle volume (SMD: 0.28, p=0.43, I2: 76%). CONCLUSION: The use of BFR following ACLR led to improvements in pain, IKDC score and isokinetic muscle strength, with variable outcomes based on quadriceps strength, volume and thickness when compared to non-BFR rehabilitation.

Lower Range of Recurrent Instability Rates Following Bankart Repair and Remplissage Compared to Isolated Bankart Repair in Patients With "Nonengaging/On-Track" Hill-Sachs Lesions and <20% Glenoid Bone Loss.

PURPOSE: To compare recurrent instability and return-to-sport rates along with external rotation differences between on-track (nonengaging) Hill-Sachs lesion patients undergoing either an isolated Bankart repair (IBR) or a Bankart repair augmented with a remplissage procedure (B+R). METHODS: A search was conducted using 3 databases (PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL) in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Only clinical comparative (level of evidence I-III) studies were considered for inclusion. Quality assessment was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. RESULTS: Six level of evidence III studies, totaling 537 patients (202 B+R and 335 IBR) were included for analysis. All patients had <20% glenoid bone loss and a nonengaging, on-track Hill-Sachs lesion. At a median final follow-up of 34.7 months, recurrent dislocation rates ranged from 0% to 7.7% and 3.5% to 30% in the B+R and IBR groups, respectively. Moreover, subjective instability and revision surgery rates presented lower ranges in the B+R upon comparison with the IBR cohort (0%-32% vs 5%-71.4% and 0%-5% vs 0%-35%, respectively). Furthermore, return to preinjury level of sports ranged from 64% to 100% in the remplissage-augmented group and 50% to 90% in the IBR cohort. Postoperative external rotation at side varied from 50° to 63° in the B+R and 55° to 63° in the IBR arm. Additional subgroup analysis revealed recurrent dislocation rates in athletes and patients with near-track Hill-Sachs lesions undergoing remplissage augmentation to be 0% to 5% and 2% to 47% while ranging from 8.8% to 30% and 9% to 66% for IBR patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Upon qualitative analysis, ranges of recurrent instability measures, including recurrent dislocation rates, are higher in patients undergoing IBR in comparison to B+R. Activity level influences outcomes as athletes were found to have a higher range of recurrent dislocation rates in the IBR group. The addition of remplissage showed a higher range of return-to-sport rates with comparable postoperative external rotation between groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of Level III studies.

Fatty Infiltration, Tear Size, and Retraction Size Are Significant Risk Factors for Retear following Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To assess the consistency and quality of risk factor reporting for rotator cuff repair (RCR) retear and identify risk factors most frequently associated with retear. METHODS: A systematic review with PRISMA guidelines was performed. Of the initial 3,158 titles, a total of 31 studies met the following inclusion criteria: (1) clinical studies regarding RCR failure, (2) arthroscopic procedures involving RCR, (3) reporting clinical outcomes (4) performed within 5 years (5) and studies investigating pre-operative risk factors for retear. After full-text review, 18 risk factors were analyzed. RESULTS: The most consistently significant risk factors were acromiohumeral distance (AHD) (80%), critical shoulder angle (CSA) (67%), tear size (63%), anterior/posterior (AP) dimension (60%), fatty infiltration (FI, 58%), and retraction size (56%). FI was analyzed using different methods between studies with 63% finding significant results and 50% of all studies performing ordinal analysis. Tear size was inconsistently analyzed quantitatively or qualitatively, with 58% finding significant results and 63% of all studies analyzing quantitatively. Risk factors consistently found to be non-significant included age, sex, diabetes mellitus (DM), symptom duration, hand dominance, repair technique, smoking and body mass index (BMI). CONCLUSIONS: Tear size, fatty infiltration, and retraction size were found to be significant risk factors in the majority of included studies evaluating rotator cuff retear. Risk factors less likely reported as predictive included repair technique, age, sex, DM, symptom duration, hand dominance, repair technique, smoking, and BMI. Risk factors that require further investigation include CSA, AHD, and AP tear dimension. Level III, systematic review of Level III-V studies.

Preoperative Depression Negatively Impacts Pain and Functionality Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To systematically investigate the influence of preoperative depression diagnosis and symptom severity on outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). METHODS: A literature search was performed using the PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases according to the 2020 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Studies evaluating the impact of depression on clinical outcomes after ACLR were included. Clinical outcomes, changes in depression, and complications were aggregated. RESULTS: Nine studies comprising 308,531 patients (mean age, 28.1 years; age range, 14-50 years) were included. The depression incidence ranged from 3.8% to 42%. Seven studies showed postoperative improvement in depression scores, with 5 reporting statistical significance. Assessment of depression exhibited substantial variability, with Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores being the most common method. Patients with depression, despite showing greater improvements in scores, experienced significantly higher PROMIS Pain Interference scores preoperatively (range, 59.1-65.7 vs 56.8-59.2) and postoperatively (range, 46.3-52.3 vs 46.3-47.4) than patients without depression. They also showed significantly lower preoperative (range, 33-38.1 vs 39.7-41.5) and postoperative (range, 51.6-56.7 vs 56.7-57.6) PROMIS Physical Function scores, regardless of greater score improvement. Patients affected by depression had significantly higher rates of minimal clinically important difference achievement for the PROMIS Physical Function score (71%-100% vs 80%) and similar rates for the PROMIS Pain Interference score (71%-81% vs 68%) compared with patients without depression in 3 studies. Depression was associated with reduced adherence to rehabilitation protocols and increased postoperative complications, including infection, graft failure, arthrofibrosis, and readmission. CONCLUSIONS: ACLR yields favorable outcomes for patients with and without preoperative depression. Individuals with preoperative depression may report inferior outcomes in terms of pain and functionality; nevertheless, despite these challenges, they exhibit significant improvements across all outcome measures after surgery, including reductions in depression levels. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II to IV studies.

Isolated Primary Latarjet Procedures for Anterior Shoulder Instability Results in High Rates of Graft Resorption and Glenohumeral Degenerative Changes With Low Rates of Failure at a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the incidence of postoperative complications after an isolated primary Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability at a minimum 2-year follow-up. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in accordance with 2020 PRISMA guidelines. EMBASE, Scopus, and PubMed databases were queried from database inception through September 2022. The literature search was limited to human clinical studies reporting on postoperative complications and adverse events after a primary Latarjet procedure with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Risk of bias was measured using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies, consisting of 1,797 patients (n = 1,816 shoulders), with a mean age of 24 years were identified. The overall postoperative complication rate ranged from 0% to 25.7%, with the most common complication being persistent shoulder pain (range: 0%-25.7%). Radiological changes included graft resorption (range: 7.5%-100%) and glenohumeral degenerative changes (range: 0%-52.5%). Recurrent instability following surgery was documented in 0% to 35% of shoulders, while the incidence of bone block fractures ranged from 0% to 6% of cases. Postoperative nonunion, infection, and hematomas had a reported incidence rate ranging from 0% to 16.7%, 0% to 2.6%, and 0% to 4.4%, respectively. Overall, 0% to 7.5% of surgeries were reported failures, and 0% to 11.1% of shoulders required reoperation, with a revision rate ranging from 0% to 7.7%. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of complications following the primary Latarjet procedure for shoulder instability was variable, ranging from 0% to 25.7%. High rates of graft resorption, degenerative changes, and nonunion were present while failure and revision rates remained low at a minimum 2-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of Level I-III studies.

Platelet-Rich Plasma, Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate, and Hyaluronic Acid Injections Outperform Corticosteroids in Pain and Function Scores at a Minimum of 6 Months as Intra-Articular Injections for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of common intra-articular injections used in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, including corticosteroid (CS), hyaluronic acid (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), with a minimum follow-up of 6-months. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines in August 2022 in the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Level I to II randomized clinical trials with a minimum follow-up of 6 months that investigated the treatments of interest were included. Patient-reported outcome scores for pain and function at baseline and at latest follow-up were extracted, and the change in scores was converted to uniform 0 to 100 scales. Arm-based Bayesian network meta-analysis using a random-effects model was created to compare the treatment arms in pain and function. RESULTS: Forty-eight studies comprising a total of 9,338 knees were included. The most studied intra-articular injection was HA (40.9%), followed by placebo (26.2%), PRP (21.5%), CS (8.8%), and then BMAC (2.5%). HA and PRP both led to a significant improvement in pain compared with placebo. HA, PRP, and BMAC all led to a significant improvement in function scores when compared with placebo. Surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRAs) of the interventions revealed that PRP, BMAC, and HA were the treatments with the highest likelihood of improvement in both pain and function, with overall SUCRA scores of 91.54, 76.46, and 53.12, respectively. The overall SUCRA scores for CS and placebo were 15.18 and 13.70, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: At a minimum 6-month follow-up, PRP demonstrated significantly improved pain and function for patients with knee osteoarthritis compared with placebo. Additionally, PRP exhibited the highest SUCRA values for these outcomes when compared with BMAC, HA, and CS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, meta-analysis of Level I to II studies.

3-dimensionally printed patient-specific glenoid drill guides vs. standard nonspecific instrumentation: a randomized controlled trial comparing the accuracy of glenoid component placement in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Traditional, commercially sourced patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) systems for shoulder arthroplasty improve glenoid component placement but can involve considerable cost and outsourcing delays. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the accuracy of glenoid component positioning in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) using an in-house, point-of-care, 3-dimensionally (3D) printed patient-specific glenoid drill guide vs. standard nonspecific instrumentation. METHODS: This single-center randomized controlled trial included 36 adult patients undergoing primary aTSA. Patients were blinded and randomized 1:1 to either the PSI or the standard aTSA guide groups. The primary endpoint was the accuracy of glenoid component placement (version and inclination), which was determined using a metal-suppression computed tomography scan taken between 6 weeks and 1 year postoperatively. Deviation from the preoperative 3D templating plan was calculated for each patient. Blinded postoperative computed tomography measurements were performed by a fellowship-trained shoulder surgeon and a musculoskeletal radiologist. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were randomized to the patient-specific glenoid drill guide group, and 17 patients were allocated to the standard instrumentation control group. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups for native version (P = .527) or inclination (P = .415). The version correction was similar between the 2 groups (P = .551), and the PSI group was significantly more accurate when correcting version than the control group (P = .042). The PSI group required a significantly greater inclination correction than the control group (P = .002); however, the 2 groups still had similar accuracy when correcting inclination (P = .851). For the PSI group, there was no correlation between the accuracy of component placement and native version, native inclination, or the Walch classification of glenoid wear (P > .05). For the control group, accuracy when correcting version was inversely correlated with native version (P = .033), but accuracy was not correlated with native inclination or the Walch classification of glenoid wear (P > .05). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.703 and 0.848 when measuring version and inclination accuracy, respectively. CONCLUSION: When compared with standard instrumentation, the use of in-house, 3D printed, patient-specific glenoid drill guides during aTSA led to more accurate glenoid component version correction and similarly accurate inclination correction. Additional research should examine the influence of proper component position and use of PSI on clinical outcomes.

Suture Anchor-Based Quadriceps Tendon Repair May Result in Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes but Similar Failure Rates Compared to the Transosseous Tunnel Technique.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare failure rates and patient-reported outcomes between transosseus (TO) suture and suture anchor (SA) quadriceps tendon repairs. METHODS: Following institutional review board approval, patients who underwent primary repair for quadriceps tendon rupture with TO or SA techniques between January 2009 and August 2018 were identified from an institutional database and retrospectively reviewed. Patients were contacted for satisfaction (1-10 scale), current function (0-100 scale), failure (retear), and revision surgeries; International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score (KOOS) were also collected to achieve a minimum of 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients (34 SA, 30 TO) were available by phone or e-mail at a mean of 4.81 ± 2.60 years postoperatively. There were 10 failures, for an overall failure rate of 15.6%. Failure incidence did not significantly differ between treatment groups (P = .83). Twenty-seven patients (47% of nonfailed patients) had completed patient-reported outcomes. The SA group reported higher subjective function (SA: 90 [85-100] vs TO: 85 [60-93], 95% CI of difference: -19.9 to -2.1 × 10-5, P = .042), final IKDC (79.6 [50.0-93.6] vs 62.1 [44.3-65.5], 95% CI of difference: -33.0 to -0.48, P = .048), KOOS Pain (97.2 [84.7-97.2] vs 73.6 [50.7-88.2], 95% CI of difference: -36.1 to -3.6 × 10-5, P = .037), Quality of Life (81.3 [56.3-93.8] vs 50.0 [23.4-56.3], 95% CI of difference: -50.0 to -6.2, P = .026), and Sport (75.0 [52.5-90.0] vs 47.5 [31.3-67.5], 95% CI of the difference: -45.0 to -4.1 × 10-5, P = .048). CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant difference in failure rate between transosseus and suture anchor repairs for quadriceps tendon ruptures (P = .83). Most failures occur secondary to a traumatic reinjury within the first year postoperatively. Despite the lack of difference in failure rates, at final follow-up, patients who undergo suture anchor repair may report significantly greater subjective function and final IKDC, KOOS Pain, Quality of Life, and Sport scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective cohort study.

Biceps Tenodesis in Patients Age 35 Years and Younger Yields Favorable Clinical Outcomes With Variable Rates of Return to Sport and Complications: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To systematically evaluate reported clinical outcomes, return-to-sport (RTS) rates, and complications following biceps tenodesis in patients aged 35 years and younger and compare outcomes between overhead and nonoverhead athletes. METHODS: A literature search was performed by querying Scopus, EMBASE, and PubMed computerized databases from database inception through August 2022 in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Studies that evaluated clinical outcomes following biceps tenodesis in patients aged 35 years or younger were included. Study quality was assessed via the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. Clinical outcomes, RTS rates, and complications were aggregated. RESULTS: Nine studies from 2011 to 2022 comprising 161 patients (mean age, 25 years; range, 19.7-28.9 years) were included. At an average follow-up of 59 months, postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score ranged from 81.6 to 96 and the mean visual analog scale score ranged from 0 to 2.1. Mean overall RTS rate ranged from 35% to 100% for the entire patient cohort 35% to 86% among overhead athletes, and 46% to 100% among nonoverhead athletes. Among the overhead athletes, 24 were baseball pitchers. 17% to 100% able to return to sport at any level. Complications were reported in 0% to 19% of patients. 0 to 18% of patients underwent revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Biceps tenodesis in patients 35 years of age and younger yields a wide variability in reported RTS rates, excellent clinical outcome scores, and low but variable reported rates of complications, reoperations, and failure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; Systematic Review of Level III and IV studies.

Medial Collateral Ligament Reconstruction and Repair Show Similar Improvement in Outcome Scores, But Repair Shows Higher Rates of Knee Stiffness and Failure: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To compare patient-reported outcomes and complications in patients with medial collateral ligament (MCL) injuries undergoing repair versus reconstruction with a minimum 2-year follow-up. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Scopus, and Embase-computerized databases from database inception to November 2022, according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies evaluating clinical outcomes and complications at a minimum of 2 years following MCL repair versus reconstruction were included. Study quality was assessed using the MINORS criteria. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies published from 1997 to 2022, consisting of 503 patients were identified. Twelve studies (n = 308 patients; mean age: 32.6 years) reported outcomes following MCL reconstruction, and 8 studies (n = 195 patients; mean age: 28.5 years) reported results following MCL repair. Postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm, and Tegner scores ranged from 67.6 to 91, 75.8 to 94.8, and 4.4 to 8, respectively, in the MCL reconstruction group, compared to 73 to 91, 75.1 to 98.5, and 5.2 to 10, respectively, in the MCL repair group. Knee stiffness was the most commonly reported complication following MCL repair (range: 0% - 50%) and reconstruction (range: 0% - 26.7%). Failures occurred in 0% to 14.6% of patients following reconstruction versus 0% to 35.1% of patients undergoing MCL repair. Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) for postoperative arthrofibrosis (range: 0% - 12.2%) and surgical debridement for arthrofibrosis (range: 0% - 20%) were the most commonly reported reoperations in the MCL reconstruction and repair groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MCL reconstruction versus repair both demonstrate improved International Knee Documentation Committee, Lysholm, and Tegner scores. MCL repair demonstrates higher rates of postoperative knee stiffness and failure at a minimum 2-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

Suture Augmentation in Orthopaedic Surgery Offers Improved Time-Zero Biomechanics and Promising Short-Term Clinical Outcomes.

Ligament and tendon ruptures have historically been addressed with varying techniques involving either repair or reconstruction. More recently, the potential biomechanical benefits of suture augmentation (SA), also known as internal brace, have attracted substantial attention and helped renew interest in ligament repair surgery. We evaluated the biomechanical and clinical outcomes of SA-based techniques in the following sports medicine procedures: medial ulnar collateral ligament repair of the elbow, thumb collateral ligament repair, anterior cruciate ligament repair, Achilles' tendon repair, and deltoid ligament repair. Published data on the use of SA to augment repairs of the ulnar collateral ligament, thumb collateral ligament, anterior cruciate ligament, Achilles' tendon, and deltoid ligament repair demonstrate improved time-zero biomechanical and promising short- to mid-term clinical outcomes. However, surgeons must be wary of potential complications, including joint overconstraint, nerve paresthesia, and infection. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.

Complication Rates After Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction Range From 0% to 32% With 0% to 11% Recurrent Instability: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To review the incidence of complications following primary medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction for recurrent patellar instability. METHODS: A literature search was conducted by querying PubMed and Scopus databases from database inception through August 2022 according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis guidelines using the terms "Medial Patellofemoral Ligament," "MPFL," "reconstruction," "patellar," and "instability." Inclusion criteria included studies reporting complications following primary MPFL reconstruction for recurrent patellar instability. Exclusion criteria consisted of studies reporting on patients undergoing concurrent osteotomy procedures, revision reconstruction, and biomechanical or anatomic studies. The incidence of specific complications was aggregated from the included studies. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies, consisting of 1,478 patients (n = 1521 knees), with a mean age of 23.3 years (mean range, 19-34.3 years) were identified. The overall incidence of complications ranged from 0% to 32.3% of knees. Failure ranged from 0% to 10.7% of knees, whereas patellar fractures occurred in 0% to 8.3% of knees, primarily in patients treated with full-length transverse tunnel or 2-tunnel techniques. All patellar fractures occurred in patients with patellar tunnels ranging from 4.5 to 6.0 mm in diameter. The incidence of postoperative knee stiffness/range of motion deficit ranged from 0% to 20%. Persistent anterior knee pain, ranged from 0% to 32.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Complications following primary MPFL reconstruction ranged from 0% to 32.3% of knees, primarily consisting of residual anterior knee pain. Failure ranged from 0% to 10.7% of knees, whereas patellar fractures were reported in 0% to 8.3% of knees. Fractures primarily occurred with a full-length transverse tunnel or 2-tunnel techniques, whereas all fractures occurred with patellar tunnels ranging from 4.5 mm to 6.0 mm in diameter. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; Systematic Review of Level I-IV studies.

Acellular Dermal Allograft and Tensor Fascia Lata Autograft Show Similar Patient Outcome Improvement and High Rates of Complications and Failures at a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To compare clinical and radiologic outcomes following superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) using dermal allograft versus tensor fascia lata (TFL) autograft for massive rotator cuff tears with a minimum 2-year follow-up. METHODS: A literature search was performed by querying Scopus, EMBASE, and PubMed computerized databases from database inception through September 2022 in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies evaluating clinical and radiologic outcomes, as well as complications following SCR for the treatment of massive rotator cuff tears were included. Study quality was assessed via the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment. The mean change from preoperative to postoperative values (delta) was calculated for each outcome. RESULTS: Seventeen studies, consisting of 519 patients were identified. Mean duration of follow-up ranged from 24 to 60 months. Mean reduction in visual analog scale pain score ranged from 2.9 to 5.9 points following use of dermal allograft, and 3.4 to 7.0 points following TFL autograft reconstruction. Mean improvements in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score were similar between groups (dermal allograft: 28.0-61.6; TFL autograft: 24.7-59.3). The mean increase in forward flexion ranged from 31° to 38° with dermal allograft, versus 19° to 69° with TFL autograft. Average improvement in active external rotation with dermal allograft ranged from -0.4° to 11° and from 2° to 22.4° using TFL autograft. A similar change in acromiohumeral distance following SCR (dermal allograft: 0.9-3.2 mm; TFL autograft: 0.3-3.6 mm) was appreciated. The rate of complications within the dermal allograft group ranged from 4.5% to 38.2% versus 13.3% to 86.4% following TFL autograft. Failure rate ranged from 4.5 to 38.2% following dermal allograft versus 4.5 to 86.4% with TFL autograft. CONCLUSIONS: Acellular dermal allograft versus TFL autograft for SCR both demonstrate improved VAS and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, with increased values in flexion and external rotation, and increased visual analog scale, although with high variability. Both grafts demonstrate high rates of complications and failures at minimum 2-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; systematic review of level II-IV studies.

PROMIS physical function and pain perform poorly psychometrically in patients undergoing medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the validity, floor and ceiling effects, and dimensionality of PROMIS Physical Function (PF) and Pain compared to legacy patient reported outcome (PRO) measures in patients undergoing medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction. METHODS: Patients who underwent MPFL reconstruction between 2018 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperatively, patients completed the IKDC, VR-12, Kujala, SF-12, KOOS JR, PROMIS PF and Pain surveys. Inter-survey convergence was assessed with Spearman correlations. Psychometric analysis included investigations of inter-survey convergent validity, intra-survey floor and ceiling effects, and Rasch analyses with person-item fit and iterative question elimination model fit testing. RESULTS: A total of 76 patients (mean age: 22.6 ± 8.4 years) who completed preoperative surveys were included (compliance: 91.7-96.2%). Preoperatively, age was significantly associated with both PROMIS PF (coefficient: - 0.291, P = 0.005) and Pain scores (coefficient: 0.294, P = 0.002). PROMIS PF had a Very Good correlation with IKDC and PROMIS Pain had a Very Good correlation with KOOS JR. Other correlations ranged from Poor to Good. No significant floor or ceiling effects were observed for any PRO. On iterative question elimination Rasch modelling, only two questions from PROMIS PF remained after 6 rounds of elimination while PROMIS Pain had no questions remaining after 3 rounds of elimination. CONCLUSION: Preoperative PROMIS PF and Pain provided only Fair to Good correlations with most legacy PROs. Although no significant floor and ceiling effects were observed, PROMIS PF and Pain did not perform well psychometrically in this population of patients undergoing MPFL reconstruction. These results suggest PROMIS questionnaires should be used with caution in this population, especially if used in isolation, when discussing clinical expectations with patients. The authors recommend continued use of legacy PROs specific to assessment of patellar instability and function that have established validity in patellar instability populations. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Return to Sport Following Distal Triceps Repair.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to examine the timeline of return-to-sport following distal triceps repair; evaluate the degree of participation and function upon returning to sport; and identify risk factors for failure to return to sport. METHODS: Patients who underwent distal triceps repair with a minimum of 1 year of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Patients completed a subjective sports questionnaire and were scored on a visual analog scale for pain; the Mayo Elbow Performance Index; the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand; and the Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation. RESULTS: Out of 113 eligible patients who had a distal triceps repair, 81 patients (71.7%) were contacted. Sixty-eight patients (84.0%) who participated in sports prior to surgery were included at 6.0 ± 4.0 years after surgery, and the average age was 46.6 ± 11.5 years. Sixty-one patients (89.7%) resumed playing at least 1 sport by 5.9 ± 4.4 months following distal triceps repair. However, 18 patients (29.5%) returned to a lower level of activity intensity. The average postoperative Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand; Mayo Elbow Performance; visual analog scale for pain; and Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation scores were 8.2 ± 14.0, 89.5 ± 13.4, 2.0 ± 1.7, and 82.2 ± 24.3, respectively. No patients underwent revision surgery at the time of final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Distal triceps repair enables 89.7% of patients to return to sport by 5.9 ± 4.4 months following surgery. However, 29.5% of patients were unable to return to their preinjury level of activity. It is imperative that patients are appropriately educated to manage postoperative expectations regarding sport participation following distal triceps repair. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Minimal inter-surgeon agreement on the diagnosis of pseudoparalysis in patients with massive rotator cuff tears.

BACKGROUND: Pseudoparalysis is commonly used to describe patients with severe loss of active elevation associated with advanced rotator cuff disease, but its definition in the literature has been variable. This study aimed to determine how 15 expert shoulder surgeons use the term "pseudoparalysis" when presented with clinical cases and assess clinical agreement on the diagnosis of pseudoparalysis. METHODS: Fifteen expert shoulder surgeons were surveyed regarding 18 patients with magnetic resonance imaging-diagnosed massive rotator cuff tears, restricted active range of motion (ROM), full passive ROM, and without advanced rotator cuff arthropathy (Hamada grade <3). The survey included 18 patient vignettes with key clinical details and a deidentified video demonstrating the physical examination of the patient. For all patients, surgeons were instructed to assume that the patient has a full passive ROM. An anteroposterior radiograph and T2 sequences of the patient's coronal, axial, and sagittal magnetic resonance imaging were also provided. After each case, the surgeons were asked: (1) does the patient have pseudoparalysis, and (2) if so, how severe it is. At the end of the patient vignettes, surgeons were asked to define pseudoparalysis using a checklist with predefined options. Surgeons were also asked if there was a difference between the term pseudoparalysis and pseudoparesis. Fleiss' kappa (κ) correlation coefficient was used to determine intersurgeon agreement. RESULTS: There was minimal inter-rater agreement on the diagnosis of pseudoparalysis (κ = 0.360) and no agreement on describing the severity of pseudoparalysis (κ = -0.057). Although 80% of surgeons stated that an active glenohumeral elevation less than 90° was a diagnostic feature of pseudoparalysis, there was disagreement on the remaining criteria, leading to no agreement on a set of universal criteria that defines pseudoparalysis. A total of 67% included maintained full passive elevation, 33% included the absence of pain, 67% included elevation causing anterosuperior escape, and 27% included an additional unlisted factor. There was minimal agreement among the 15 surgeons on the diagnostic criteria of pseudoparalysis (κ = 0.092). Finally, 7 surgeons stated that pseudoparalysis and pseudoparesis are identical, whereas 8 surgeons stated that they are 2 different clinical diagnoses. CONCLUSION: Among this panel of expert shoulder surgeons, there was a lack of consensus on the definition of pseudoparalysis and minimal agreement on the diagnosis of pseudoparalysis based on clinical scenarios. In addition, half the surgeons believed that pseudoparalysis and pseudoparesis are identical, whereas the other half believed that they represent 2 separate clinical entities. A standardized definition of pseudoparalysis would be of value to facilitate communication and research efforts.

A validated preoperative risk prediction tool for extended inpatient length of stay following anatomic or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Recent work has shown inpatient length of stay (LOS) following shoulder arthroplasty to hold the second strongest association with overall cost (after implant cost itself). In particular, a preoperative understanding for the patients at risk of extended inpatient stays (≥3 days) can allow for counseling, optimization, and anticipating postoperative adverse events. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective review was performed of 5410 anatomic (52%) and reverse (48%) total shoulder arthroplasties done at 2 large, tertiary referral health systems. The primary outcome was extended inpatient LOS of at least 3 days, and over 40 preoperative sociodemographic and comorbidity factors were tested for their predictive ability in a multivariable logistic regression model based on the patient cohort from institution 1 (derivation, N = 1773). External validation was performed using the patient cohort from institution 2 (validation, N = 3637), including area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. RESULTS: A total of 814 patients, including 318 patients (18%) in the derivation cohort and 496 patients (14%) in the validation cohort, experienced an extended inpatient LOS of at least 3 days. Four hundred forty-five (55%) were discharged to a skilled nursing or rehabilitation facility. Following parameter selection, a multivariable logistic regression model based on the derivation cohort (institution 1) demonstrated excellent preliminary accuracy (AUC: 0.826), with minimal decrease in accuracy under external validation when tested against the patients from institution 2 (AUC: 0.816). The predictive model was composed of only preoperative factors, in descending predictive importance as follows: age, marital status, fracture case, ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) score, paralysis, electrolyte disorder, body mass index, gender, neurologic disease, coagulation deficiency, diabetes, chronic pulmonary disease, peripheral vascular disease, alcohol dependence, psychoses, smoking status, and revision case. CONCLUSION: A freely-available, preoperative online clinical decision tool for extended inpatient LOS (≥ 3 days) after shoulder arthroplasty reaches excellent predictive accuracy under external validation. As a result, this tool merits consideration for clinical implementation, as many risk factors are potentially modifiable as part of a preoperative optimization strategy.