Risk of radial head arthroplasty revision is correlated with radial head diameter: a multicenter analysis of 405 cases.

BACKGROUND: Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) is commonly used for the treatment of comminuted radial head fractures. Indications as well as implant types continue to evolve. RHA has had good outcomes with midterm longevity. The literature is limited to small case series with varying implant types, and larger studies are needed to determine the optimal implant type and radial head diameter. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of RHA cases performed by 75 surgeons at 14 medical centers in an integrated health care system between 2006 and 2017 was completed. Patient demographics, comorbidities, implant type and head diameter, and indications for revision were recorded. Patients' in-person clinical visit data were recorded. Patients were also contacted via telephone at a minimum of 2 years to obtain abbreviated Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire and Oxford scores. Implant survivorship was also captured within our integrated system. RESULTS: 405 cases met our inclusion criteria. Mean age was 51.5 ± 15.5 years (range 16-88 years) and more common in females (62%). Chart review and telephone follow-up was performed at a mean of 68.9 ± 31.5 months (range 24-146 months). Our study found that revision rate was positively correlated with increasing radial head diameter. A 26-mm head had 7.7 odds of revision compared to a size 18-mm head (95% confidence interval 1.2-150.1). More than 95% of revision cases were performed within the first 36 months of the index procedure. Obese patients had a significantly lower mean postoperative Oxford score (35.5) compared to controls (38.3) (P = .02). There was a significantly higher overall reoperation rate for terrible triad (18.4%) vs. isolated injuries (10.4%) (P = .04). There was no difference between Acumed Anatomic and Evolve radial head implants in overall reoperation, implant revision, postoperative range of motion, or patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of revision is directly correlated with implanted radial head diameter. There were no differences in outcomes and complications between the 2 main implants used. Individuals who did not undergo a revision by 3 years' time tend to retain the implant. Terrible triad injuries had a higher all-cause reoperation rate than isolated radial head fractures, but no difference in the rate of RHA revision. These data reinforce the practice of downsizing radial head implant diameter.

Radial head arthroplasty: a descriptive study of 970 patients in an integrated health care system.

BACKGROUND: Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) is commonly performed for isolated comminuted radial head fractures and in conjunction with traumatic elbow instability. However, there is a paucity of literature directly describing the characteristics and outcomes of patients who undergo RHA in a community-based setting. We describe a cohort of 970 RHA performed in the California regions of a US integrated health care system over a 9-year period. Patient demographics, implant selection, 90-day acute postoperative events, and cumulative reoperation/revision rates are included. METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years who underwent primary RHA were identified (2009-2017). Patient characteristics and demographics, including age, body mass index, gender, diabetes status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, primary diagnosis, and concomitant procedures were described. Crude cumulative revision and reoperation probabilities were calculated as 1 minus the Kaplan-Meier estimator, with follow-up time calculated as the time from the index RHA to revision/reoperation date for those with the outcome of interest and time from index RHA to censoring date (eg, date of death, health care termination, study end date [March 31, 2018]) for those without the outcome. Ninety-day postoperative incidence of emergency department (ED) visit, readmission, and mortality was calculated as the number of patients with the event of interest over the number of patients at risk. RESULTS: A total of 970 patients underwent primary unilateral RHA by 205 surgeons during the study period. Annual procedure volume increased from 53 procedures in 2009 to 157 procedures in 2017. More patients were female, without diabetes, and had an ASA classification of 1 or 2. Fracture was the predominant indication for RHA (98.4%) and more than half (54.3%) had concomitant procedures performed. Most implants were press fit (63.2%) over loose fit, and >90% were monopolar. Three-year cumulative revision and reoperation probabilities following RHA were 6.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.0%-8.5%) and 8.2% (95% CI = 6.5%-10.3%), respectively. Revisions and reoperations tended to occur within the first postoperative year. Of the 970 RHA patients, 83 (8.5%) had a 90-day ED visit, 58 (6.0%) had a 90-day readmission, and 1 (0.1%) died within a 90-day postoperative period. CONCLUSION: This large cohort of RHA patients provides information about the practice of RHA at large and in the community. Surgeons are performing more RHA over time and choosing press fit stems more often. Revisions and reoperations tended to occur early. Readmission and ED visits were low but not negligible, with pain being the most common reason for ED visit.

Total Elbow Arthroplasty: A Descriptive Analysis of 170 Patients From a United States Integrated Health Care System.

PURPOSE: Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) can be used, with varying degrees of success, for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, and distal humerus fractures and their sequelae in elderly patients. Some of the largest studies of TEA have included data from more than 20 years ago and may not reflect the current practice of TEA. We sought to describe a modern cohort of patients who underwent TEA in a United States integrated health care system. METHODS: All patients aged 18 years and older who underwent primary unilateral TEA from January 1, 2009, through March 31, 2018, were identified to conduct a descriptive study. The patients' characteristics and demographics, including age, body mass index, sex, diabetes status, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and surgical indication, were recorded. The crude cumulative revision probability as well as the 90-day postoperative incidence rate of emergency department visit, readmission, and mortality was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 170 patients met our inclusion criteria. The annual procedure volume nearly doubled, from 11 procedures in 2009 to 21 procedures in 2017. The most common indication for TEA was fracture (40.6%), followed by rheumatoid arthritis (36.5%). At 4-year follow up, the crude cumulative revision probability was 9.8% (95% confidence interval, 5.6%-16.9%). Of the 170 patients who underwent TEA, 43 (25.3%) experienced a 90-day emergency department visit, 24 (14.1%) experienced a 90-day readmission, and 2 (1.2%) died within 90 days postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: This cohort of patients who underwent TEA using modern implants showed a notable increase in the volume of TEA over the study period, with more TEAs performed for trauma. The incidence of readmission and emergency department visits following TEA were high in this study. Further studies are needed to better define the current practice of TEA in the community at large. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Operative Treatment of Acute Patellar Tendon Ruptures.

BACKGROUND: The gold standard for patellar tendon repair is a transosseous technique. Suture anchor repair has gained popularity, with recent biomechanical studies demonstrating significantly less gap formation during cyclic loading and significantly higher ultimate failure loads as compared with transosseous repair. These findings have not been substantiated in a large clinical cohort. PURPOSE: To report demographic and epidemiologic data, clinical and surgical findings, and outcomes and complications of anchor and transosseous suture repairs of acute patellar tendon ruptures. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All patients who underwent a primary repair of a traumatic patellar tendon rupture within 45 days of injury between 2006 and 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Surgery was performed at a multisurgeon (120 surgeons) multicenter (14 centers) community-based integrated health care system. Patient demographic information, repair type, complications, and time from surgery to release from medical care were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 361 patients (374 knees) met our inclusion criteria. The mean age was 39.8 years (range, 9-86 years), and 91.7% were male. There were 321 transosseous and 53 anchor repairs. There was no significant difference in the mean age (P = .27), sex (P = .79), tourniquet time (P = .93), or body mass index (P = .78) between the groups. There was a significant difference in rerupture rate between transosseous and anchor repairs (7.5% vs 0%, respectively; P = .034). Based on logistic regression, transosseous repair had 3.24 times the odds of reoperation verseus anchor repair (95% CI, 0.757-13.895; P = .1129). The infection rate was 1.6% for transosseous repair and 7.5% for anchor repair (P = .160). There was no difference in time to release from medical care: 18.4 weeks for anchor and 17.1 weeks for transosseous repairs (P = .92). CONCLUSION: Anchor repair demonstrated a significant decrease in rerupture rate when compared with transosseous repair. There was no difference in reoperation rate, infection rate, or time to release from medical care.

Risk Factors and Complications Following Arthroscopic Tenotomy of the Long Head of the Biceps Tendon.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exits regarding performing a tenotomy versus a tenodesis of the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT). PURPOSE: To evaluate the complications after arthroscopic tenotomy of the LHBT and characterize the incidence of cosmetic deformity, cramping, subjective weakness, and continued anterior shoulder pain (ASP). Additionally, to identify patient-related factors that may predispose a patient to these complications. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Records of patients who underwent an arthroscopic LHBT tenotomy at an integrated health care system under the care of 55 surgeons were retrospectively reviewed. Exclusion criteria included LHBT tenodesis, arthroplasty, neoplastic, or fracture surgery; age younger than 18 years; incomplete documentation of physical examination; or incomplete operative reports. Characteristic data, concomitant procedures, LHBT morphology, and postoperative complications were recorded. Patients with and without postoperative complications-including cosmetic deformity, subjective weakness, continued ASP, and cramping-were analyzed by age, sex, dominant arm, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, workers' compensation status, and intraoperative LHBT morphology to identify risk factors for developing these postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 192 patients who underwent LHBT tenotomy were included in the final analysis. Tenotomy was performed with concomitant shoulder procedures in all but 1 individual. The mean ± SD patient age was 60.6 ± 9.5 years, and 55% were male. The overall complication rate was 37%. The most common postoperative complications include cosmetic (Popeye) deformity (14.1%), subjective weakness (10.4%), cramping (10.4%), and continued postoperative ASP over the bicipital groove (7.8%). Every 10-year increase in age was associated with 0.52 (95% CI, 0.28-0.94) times the odds of continued ASP and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.36-0.98) times the odds of cramping pain. Male patients had 3.9 (95% CI, 1.4-10.8) times the odds of cosmetic (Popeye) deformity. Patients who had active workers' compensation claims had 12.5 (95% CI, 2.4-63.4) times the odds of having continued postoperative ASP. Tenotomy on the dominant arm, BMI, and active smoking status demonstrated no statistically significant association with postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Patients experiencing complications after tenotomy were significantly younger and more likely to be male and to have a workers' compensation injury. LHBT tenotomy may best be indicated for elderly patients, female patients, and those without active workers' compensation claims.

Rationale for Biologic Augmentation of Rotator Cuff Repairs.

The structural integrity of rotator cuff repair (RCR) has been a primary focus for shoulder surgeons seeking long-term clinical and functional success. Improvements in surgical techniques have allowed for superior initial biomechanical fixation. However, tendon healing remains a significant clinical problem even after rigid time-zero repair. The lack of long-term healing has led to increased interest in biologic augmentation to improve tendon-to-bone healing. This interest has led to a rise in the investigation of small molecular therapies, cell-based strategies, and tissue-derived treatments offering surgeons a new therapeutic toolbox for potentially improving RCR long-term outcomes. However, the delivery, efficacy, and safety of these treatments remain under investigation. Additional well-designed, high-level studies are of paramount importance in creating evidence-based guidelines for the implementation of new biologic solutions. This review article discusses the current preclinical, translational, and clinical experience with and rationale for biologic augmentation in RCR.

Complications of biceps tenodesis based on location, fixation, and indication: a review of 1526 shoulders.

BACKGROUND: Long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) tenodesis is predominantly performed for 2 reasons: anterior shoulder pain (ASP) or structural reasons (partial tear, dislocation). METHODS: Between 2006 and 2014, all cases of primary LHBT tenodesis performed at an integrated health care system were retrospectively reviewed. Complications were analyzed by tenodesis location (below or out of the groove [OOG] vs leaving tendon in the groove [ITG]), fixation method (soft tissue vs implant), and indication (preoperative ASP vs structural). RESULTS: Among 1526 shoulders, persistent ASP did not differ by fixation method (11.0% for implant vs 12.8% for soft tissue, P = .550) or location (10.8% for OOG vs 12.9% for ITG, P = .472). Soft-tissue tenodesis cases had more frequent new-onset ASP (11.9% vs 2.6%, P < .001) and subjective weakness (8.50% vs 3.92%, P < .001) but less frequent revisions (0% vs 1.19%, P = .03) than implant tenodesis cases. No difference was found between ITG and OOG for persistent ASP (12.9% vs 10.8%, P = .550), new-onset ASP (6.5% vs 2.8%, P = .339), cramping (1.70% vs 2.31%, P = .737), deformity (4.72% vs 4.62%, P = .532), or subjective weakness (6.23% vs 4.32%, P = .334), but ITG cases had more revisions (1.51% vs 0.60%, P = .001). Among implant tenodesis cases, 1 shoulder (0.085%) sustained a fracture. CONCLUSION: The overall complication rate of LHBT tenodesis was low. Of the shoulders, 10.8% to 12.9% continued to have ASP, regardless of whether the LHBT was left ITG. Soft-tissue tenodesis cases had higher rates of new-onset ASP and subjective weakness. No significant difference for tenodesis ITG or OOG was found in biceps-related complications.

Operative Management of Acute Triceps Tendon Ruptures: Review of 184 Cases.

BACKGROUND: Distal triceps tendon ruptures are rare. The authors present a series of 184 surgically treated, acute, traumatic triceps tendon avulsions and compare the complications between those treated with anchors (A) versus transosseous (TO) suture repair. HYPOTHESIS: No difference exists in the retear rate between TO and A repairs. Study Designed: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All patients who underwent an open primary repair of a traumatic triceps tendon avulsion within 90 days of injury, between 2007 and 2015, were retrospectively reviewed. Surgeries were performed within a multisurgeon (75 surgeons), multicenter (14 centers), community-based integrated health care system. Patient demographic information, type of repair, complications, and time from surgery to release from medical care were recorded. RESULTS: 184 triceps tears in 181 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 49 years (range, 15-83 years). There were 169 males. The most common mechanisms of injury were fall (56.5%) and weight lifting (19%). Mean time from injury to surgery was 19 days (range, 1-90 days); in 74.5% of cases, surgery was performed in 3 weeks or less. There were 105 TO and 73 A repairs. No significant difference was found between the two groups in the mean age ( P = .18), sex ( P = .51), completeness of tears ( P = .74), tourniquet time ( P = .455), and prevalence of smokers ( P = .64). Significant differences were noted between TO and A repairs in terms of reruptures (6.7% vs 0%, respectively; P = .0244), overall reoperation rate (9.5% vs 1.4%; P = .026), and release from medical care (4.3 vs 3.4 months; P = .0014), but no difference was seen in infection rate (3.8% vs 0%; P = .092). No difference was noted in release from medical care in patients who underwent surgery 3 weeks or less after injury compared with those undergoing surgery more than 3 weeks after injury (3.90 vs 4.09 months, respectively; P = .911). CONCLUSION: Primary repair of triceps ruptures with TO fixation has a significantly higher rerupture rate, higher reoperation rate, and longer release from medical care than does repair with A fixation. Implementation of suture anchors in triceps repairs offers a lower complication rate and earlier release from medical care.

Surgical Treatment of Distal Biceps Tendon Ruptures: An Analysis of Complications in 784 Surgical Repairs.

BACKGROUND: Distal biceps brachii tendon ruptures lead to substantial deficits in elbow flexion and supination; surgical repair restores muscle strength and endurance. PURPOSE: To examine clinical and surgical outcomes for distal biceps tendon repairs in a large, multispecialty, integrated health care system. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of distal biceps tendon repairs performed between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2015. The repair methods were classified as double-incision approach using bone tunnel-suture fixation or anterior single-incision approach. Anterior single incisions were further classified according to the fixation method: cortical button alone, cortical button and interference screw, or suture anchors alone. Patient demographics, surgeon characteristics, range of motion, and complications were analyzed for all repair types. RESULTS: Of the 784 repairs that met the inclusion criteria, 639 (81.5%) were single-incision approaches. When comparing double-incision and single-incision repairs, there was a significantly higher rate of posterior interosseous nerve palsy (3.4% vs 0.8%, P = .010), heterotopic bone formation (7.6% vs 2.7%, P = .004), and reoperation (8.3% vs 2.3%, P < .001). The most common nerve complication encountered was a lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve palsy (n = 162), which was significantly more common in the single-incision repairs than in the double-incision repairs (24.4% vs 4.1%, P < .001). When excluding lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve palsies, there was no significant difference in the overall nerve palsies between single-incision and double-incision (5.8% vs 6.9%, P = .612). The overall rate of tendon rerupture was 1.9% (single incision, 1.6%; double incision, 2.8%; P = .327). The overall rate of postoperative wound infection was 1.5% (single incision, 1.3%; double incision, 2.8%; P = .182). The average time from surgery to release from medical care was 14.4 weeks (single incision, 14 weeks; double incision, 16 weeks; P = .286). Patients treated with cortical button plus interference screw were released significantly sooner than were patients with other single-incision repair types (13.1 ± 8.01 weeks, P = .011). There were no significant differences in rates of motor neurapraxia, infection, rerupture, and reoperation with regard to surgeon's years of practice, fellowship training, or case volume. CONCLUSION: The surgical repair of distal biceps tendon ruptures has an overall low rate of serious complications, regardless of approach or technique. However, the double-incision technique has a higher rate of posterior interosseous nerve palsy, heterotopic bone formation, and reoperation rate. Surgeon's years of practice, fellowship training, and case volume do not affect the rate of major complications.