Preoperative Corticosteroid Injections Within 4 Weeks of Arthroscopic Shoulder Procedures Are Associated With Increased Postoperative Infection Rates.

PURPOSE: To refine the understanding of the effect of timing of corticosteroid injections (CSIs) and shoulder arthroscopy on postoperative infection. METHODS: An insurance database was used to determine all patients who underwent shoulder arthroscopy for a 5-year period with an associated preoperative ipsilateral corticosteroid injection. Patients were stratified into cohorts based on timing of preoperative CSI: (1) 0-<2 weeks, (2) 2-<4 weeks, (3) 4-<6 weeks, and (4) 6-<8 weeks. Patients were pooled to include all patients who had a CSI less than 4 weeks and those longer than 4 weeks. A cohort of patients who never had a corticosteroid injection before undergoing arthroscopy were used as a control. All patients had a follow-up of 2 years. Multivariable regression analyses were performed using R Studio with significance defined as P < .05. RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regression showed a greater odds ratio (OR) for postoperative infection in patients who received CSI 0-<2 weeks before shoulder arthroscopy at 90 days (3.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.62-5.57, P < .001), 1 year (2.51, 95% CI 1.46-4.12, P < .001), and 2 years (2.08, 95% CI 1.27-3.28, P = .002) compared with the control group. Patients who received CSI 2-<4 weeks before shoulder arthroscopy had greater OR for infection at 90 days (2.26, 95% CI 1.28-3.83, P = .03), 1 year (1.82, 95% CI 1.13-2,82, P = .01), and 2 years (1.62, 95% CI 1.10-2.47, P = .012). Patients who received CSI after 4 weeks had similar ORs of infection at 90 days (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.78-1.69, P = .48) 1 year (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.85-1.63 P = .33), and 2 years (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.83-1.42, P = .54), compared with the control cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The present study shows the postoperative infection risk is greatest when CSIs are given within 2 weeks of shoulder arthroscopy, whereas CSIs given within 2-<4 weeks also portend increased risk, albeit to a lesser degree. The risk of postoperative infection is not significantly increased when CSIs are given more than 1 month before surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative, prognosis study.

Elevated risk of prosthetic infections in cannabis users after shoulder arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: An increasing number of states are beginning to legalize recreational cannabis use, and as such, more patients using cannabis are undergoing shoulder arthroplasty procedures. The present study sought to examine the impact of cannabis use on post-operative outcomes. The primary outcomes of interest were postoperative complications, which included infection, periprosthetic fractures, periprosthetic joint infections (PJI), dislocations, and aseptic loosening as well as medical complications. Secondary outcomes were risk factors for PJI and aseptic loosening at two-years. METHODS: A private, nationwide, all-payer database (Pearldiver Technologies) was queried to identify shoulder arthroplasty patients from 2010 to 2020. Those not using tobacco or cannabis ("control", n = 10,000), tobacco users (n = 10,000), cannabis users (n = 155), and concurrent tobacco and cannabis users (n = 9,842) were identified. Risk factors for PJI and aseptic loosening at two-years were further quantified utilizing multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Compared to non-users, cannabis users experienced the highest odds for PJI and aseptic revisions, which were followed by concurrent cannabis and tobacco users and tobacco-only users. Concurrent users, as well as tobacco users were at higher risk for dislocation. Cannabis use was the most significant risk factor for PJI, followed by concurrent use and male sex. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found cannabis use to cause greater risk for superficial and deep infection. More research involving randomized trials are needed to fully elucidate the impact of cannabis use on shoulder arthroplasty procedures. Clinically, these findings can appropriately guide surgeons and patients alike regarding expectations prior to undergoing TSA.

Open versus arthroscopic treatment of the rheumatoid elbow arthritis: a comparison of complications at two years utilizing a nationally representative database.

PURPOSE: Symptomatic rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be addressed surgically with open procedures or elbow arthroscopy. Previous studies comparing outcomes of open to arthroscopic arthrolysis for the management of RA did not utilize a large database study. The aim was to compare demographics and two-year complications, in RA patients undergoing open or arthroscopic elbow arthrolysis. METHODS: A retrospective, cohort study was performed utilizing a private, nationwide, all-payer database. We queried the database to identify patients undergoing open (n = 578) or arthroscopic (n = 379) arthrolysis for elbow RA. The primary goal of the study was to compare complications at two-years. Categorical variables were assessed utilizing the chi-squared test; while, continuous variables were analyzed using the Student's t-test. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess risk factors for infection following open or arthroscopic arthrolysis. RESULTS: RA patients undergoing open elbow arthrolysis were older (55 vs. 49 years, p < 0.001), predominately female (61.6% vs 60.9%, p = 0.895), and likely to have chronic kidney disease (20.4 vs. 12.9%), and DM (45.2 vs. 32.2%) (both p < 0.005). Open elbow arthrolysis was also associated with higher rates of infection (31.7 vs. 4.7%) and wound complications (26.8 vs. 3.4%) (both p = 0.001). Nerve injury rates were found to be similar (8.3 vs. 9.0%, p = 0.81). On multivariable logistic regression, open elbow procedures were associated with the highest risk for infection (OR: 8.43). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing open arthrolysis for RA were at a higher risk of infection and wound complications compared to arthroscopic arthrolysis utilizing a nationally representative database. While there appears to be a difference in outcomes following these two procedures, higher level evidence is needed to draw more definitive conclusions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective, Level III.

Does needle penetration of the shoulder joint prior to arthroscopy increase infection risk? The effect of preoperative magnetic resonance arthrogram or corticosteroid injection.

BACKGROUND: Prior literature has associated preoperative corticosteroid shoulder injection (CSI) with infection following shoulder surgery. A recent study found an equally elevated risk of total knee arthroplasty infection with preoperative injection of either CSI or hyaluronic acid. The implication is that violation of a joint prior to surgery, even in the absence of corticosteroid, may pose an elevated risk of infection following orthopedic surgery. The aim of the present study was to determine whether violation of the shoulder joint for magnetic resonance arthrogram (MRA) poses an elevated risk of infection following shoulder arthroscopy, and to compare this risk to that introduced by preoperative CSI. METHODS: A national, all-payer database was queried to identify patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopy between January 2015 and October 2020. Patients were stratified into the following groups: (1) no CSI or MRA within 6 months of surgery (n = 5000), (2) CSI within 2 weeks of surgery (n = 1055), (3) CSI between 2 and 4 weeks prior to surgery (n = 2575), (4) MRA within 2 weeks of surgery (n = 414), and (5) MRA between 2 and 4 weeks prior to surgery (n = 1138). Postoperative infection (septic shoulder or surgical site infection) was analyzed at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years, postoperatively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis controlled for differences among groups. RESULTS: MRA within 2 weeks prior to shoulder surgery was associated with an increased risk of infection at 1 year (odds ratio [OR], 2.17; P = .007), while MRA 2-4 weeks preceding surgery was not associated with an increased risk of postoperative infection at any time point. By comparison, CSI within 2 weeks prior to surgery was associated with an increased risk of postoperative infection at 90 days (OR, 1.72; P = .022), 1 year (OR, 1.65; P = .005), and 2 years (OR, 1.63; P = .002) following surgery. Similarly, CSI 2-4 weeks prior to surgery was associated with an increased risk of postoperative infection at 90 days (OR, 1.83; P < .001), 1 year (OR, 1.62; P < .001), and 2 years (OR, 1.79; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Preoperative CSI within 4 weeks of shoulder arthroscopy elevates the risk of postoperative infection. Needle arthrotomy for shoulder MRA elevates the risk of infection in a more limited fashion. Avoidance of MRA within 2 weeks of shoulder arthroscopy may mitigate postoperative infection risk. Additionally, the association between preoperative CSI and postoperative infection may be more attributed to medication profile than to needle arthrotomy.

Increased actual sling wear is associated with better early patient-reported and image-based outcomes after shoulder surgery.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have failed to show differences in functional outcomes for patient-reported sling use after rotator cuff repair. Temperature-sensing devices are used to more accurately measure brace adherence. The purposes of this study were to quantify actual sling adherence and its predictors and to establish whether increased sling adherence is associated with improved functional and image-based outcomes. METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study of 65 patients undergoing shoulder surgery requiring ≥4 weeks of postoperative sling use. Temperature-sensing devices were implanted in the slings to monitor sling adherence. Patient-reported sling adherence was determined from a questionnaire. Patients were considered 80% adherent if they wore the sling 16 h/d (112 h/week) when 20 h/d was prescribed. The primary outcomes were patient-reported and actual sling adherence, patient-reported outcomes (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and visual analog scale pain score) within 12 months postoperatively, and image-based failure based on ultrasound or radiography at 6 weeks and 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: Patient-reported sling adherence was highly sensitive (82.8%), was poorly specific (28.6%), had low accuracy (53.1%), and was weakly correlated with actual sling adherence (r = 0.32, P = .009). On multivariable logistic regression analysis, male patients were 91% less likely than female patients to be adherent with sling use (odds ratio, 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.42; P = .002). Additionally, obese and morbidly obese patients were 88% (95% CI, 0.02-0.84; P = .033) and 98% (95% CI, 0.002-0.27; P = .003), respectively, less likely than non-obese patients to adhere to sling wear postoperatively. After we controlled for surgical procedure, visual analog scale pain scores were significantly better at 6 weeks (ß = -1.47; 95% CI, -2.88 to -0.05; P = .04) and 3 months (ß = -1.68; 95% CI, -3.28 to -0.08; P = .04) if patients adhered to sling wear. A receiver operating characteristic curve showed that 13.6 hours and 15.4 hours of daily sling wear optimized image-based outcomes at 6 weeks (failure rate, 0% vs. 16%; P = .01) and 1 year (failure rate, 3% vs. 28%; P = .008) postoperatively, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrate that patient-reported sling adherence is unreliable, adherence can be predicted by female sex and lower body mass index, and increased sling adherence is associated with improved early pain scores and image-based outcomes. These data can help inform future studies using postoperative sling protocols as patient-reported sling adherence is not an accurate method to assess sling use.

Does timing matter? The effect of preoperative smoking cessation on the risk of infection or revision following rotator cuff repair.

BACKGROUND: Nicotine in tobacco products is known to impair bone and tendon healing, and smoking has been associated with an increased rate of retear and reoperation following rotator cuff repair (RCR). Although smoking is known to increase the risk of failure following RCR, former smoking status and the timing of preoperative smoking cessation have not previously been investigated. METHODS: A national all-payer database was queried for patients undergoing RCR between 2010 and 2020. Patients were stratified into 5 mutually exclusive groups according to smoking history: (1) never smokers (n = 50,000), (2) current smokers (n = 28,291), (3) former smokers with smoking cessation 3-6 months preoperatively (n = 34,513), (4) former smokers with smoking cessation 6-12 months preoperatively (n = 786), and (5) former smokers with smoking cessation >12 months preoperatively (n = 1399). The risks of postoperative infection and revision surgery were assessed at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years following surgery. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to isolate and evaluate risk factors for postoperative complications. RESULTS: The 90-day rate of infection following RCR was 0.28% in never smokers compared with 0.51% in current smokers and 0.52% in former smokers who quit smoking 3-6 months prior to surgery (P < .001). Multivariate logistic regression identified smoking (odds ratio [OR], 1.49; P < .001) and smoking cessation 3-6 months prior to surgery (OR, 1.56; P < .001) as risk factors for 90-day infection. The elevated risk in these groups persisted at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. However, smoking cessation >6 months prior to surgery was not associated with a significant elevation in infection risk. In addition, smoking was associated with an elevated 90-day revision risk (OR, 1.22; P = .038), as was smoking cessation between 3 and 6 months prior to surgery (OR, 1.19; P = .048). The elevated risk in these groups persisted at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Smoking cessation >6 months prior to surgery was not associated with a statistically significant elevation in revision risk. CONCLUSION: Current smokers and former smokers who quit smoking within 6 months of RCR are at an elevated risk of postoperative infection and revision surgery at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively compared with never smokers. Former smokers who quit >6 months prior to RCR are not at a detectably elevated risk of infection or revision surgery compared with those who have never smoked.

Acromion morphology is associated with glenoid bone loss in posterior glenohumeral instability.

BACKGROUND: The acromion morphology in a shoulder with posterior instability differs from that of a shoulder without glenohumeral instability. Specifically, the acromion with a flatter sagittal tilt, greater posterior acromial height, and less posterior coverage is associated with posterior instability. However, the association between acromion morphology and glenoid bone loss (GBL) in the setting of posterior glenohumeral instability has not previously been investigated. The purpose of this study was to determine whether acromial morphology influences the extent or pattern of posterior GBL in a cohort of patients with posterior glenohumeral instability. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective study identified 89 shoulders with unidirectional posterior glenohumeral instability. Total area GBL was measured using the best-fit circle method on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Shoulders were divided into 3 groups: (1) no GBL (n = 30), (2) GBL 0%-13.5% (n = 45), or (3) GBL ≥13.5% (n = 14). Acromion measurements were performed on MRI and included acromial tilt, posterior acromial height, anterior acromial coverage, and posterior acromial coverage. RESULTS: Patients without GBL had a steeper acromial tilt (58.5° ± 1.4°) compared with those with 0%-13.5% GBL (64.3° ± 1.5°) or GBL ≥13.5% (67.7° ± 1.8°) (P = .004). Patients without GBL also had greater posterior coverage (65.4° ± 1.7°) compared with those with GBL (60.3° ± 1.4°) (P = .015). Posterior acromion height was not significantly different among groups. CONCLUSION: The results demonstrate that an acromion with a flatter sagittal tilt and less posterior coverage is associated with GBL in the setting of posterior glenohumeral instability. This is important to consider as posterior GBL has been identified as a risk factor for failure of posterior soft tissue-stabilizing procedures.

Does Fracture Pattern Really Predict Displacement of LC1 Sacral Fractures?

BACKGROUND: Operative management of minimally displaced lateral compression type-1 (LC1) pelvic ring injuries remains controversial. We aimed to assess the proportion of LC1 pelvic fractures that displaced following nonoperative management as a function of specific ring fracture patterns, and we quantified the magnitude of this displacement. METHODS: A retrospective review of the billing registry of a level-I trauma center was performed. Two hundred and seventy-three patients with a high-energy LC1 pelvic ring fracture and <5 mm of sacral displacement were included. The fracture pattern was characterized with use of computed tomography (CT) scans and radiographs. Absolute and interval pelvic ring displacement were quantified with use of previously described methodology. RESULTS: Thirty-five pelvic ring injuries (13%) were displaced. The rate of displacement was 31% (15 of 49) for LC1 injuries involving a complete sacral fracture and bilateral ramus fractures, 12% (7 of 58) for injuries involving a complete sacral fracture and a unilateral ramus fracture, and 10% (5 of 52) for injuries involving an incomplete sacral fracture and bilateral ramus fractures. In displaced injuries, the average interval displacement was 4.2 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8 to 6.8) and the final displacement was 9.9 mm ± 4.2 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that fracture characteristics can be used to predict the likelihood of displacement of LC1 fractures that are treated without surgery. To our knowledge, the present study is the first to describe the magnitude of displacement that may occur in association with LC1 pelvic ring injuries that are treated nonoperatively; however, further studies are needed to determine the clinical impact of this displacement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Validation of Temperature Sensors to Monitor Thermoplastic Splint Wear in Hand Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to validate the use of temperature sensors to accurately measure thermoplastic volar forearm splint wear in a healthy cohort of volunteers using 5- and 15-minute temperature measurement intervals. METHODS: A prospective diagnostic study was performed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of temperature sensors in monitoring splint wear in 8 healthy volunteers between December 2022 and June 2023. Temperature sensors were molded into thermoplastic volar forearm splints. Volunteers who were familiar with the study aims were asked to keep an exact log of the time spent wearing the splint ("actual wear time"). Sensors recorded temperatures every 5 or 15 minutes, and separate algorithms were developed to determine the sensor-detected wear time compared with the actual wear time as the gold standard. The algorithms were then externally validated with the total population. RESULTS: The 5-minute and 15-minute algorithms demonstrated excellent sensitivity (99.1% vs 96.6%), specificity (99.9% vs 99.9%), positive (99.4% vs 99.5%) and negative (99.9% vs 99.3%) predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy (99.8% vs 99.3%), respectively. The 5-minute algorithm recorded 99.5% of the total splint hours, whereas the 15-minute algorithm recorded 96.1%. There was no significant difference between the actual time per wear session (5.4 ± 2.7 hours) and the time estimated by the 5-minute algorithm (5.4 ± 2.6 hours; P = .40), but there was a significant difference for the 15-minute algorithm (5.2 ± 2.6 hours; P < .001). CONCLUSION: Temperature sensors can be used to accurately monitor thermoplastic volar forearm splint wear. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic II.

Cannabis Use in Patients With Distal Radius Fractures: A Moment of Unity?

BACKGROUND: As legalization of cannabis spreads, an increasing number of patients who use cannabis are being seen in the clinical setting. This study examined the impact of cannabis and tobacco use on postoperative complications following open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of distal radius fractures. METHODS: A national, all-payer database was queried to identify patients who underwent ORIF of a distal radius fracture between 2015 and 2020 (n = 970 747). Patients were stratified into the following groups: (1) tobacco use (n = 86 941), (2) cannabis use (n = 898), (3) tobacco and cannabis use (n = 9842), and (4) neither tobacco nor cannabis use ("control", 747 892). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for infection, nonunion, and malunion within the first postoperative year. RESULTS: Concomitant use of tobacco and cannabis was associated with a higher rate of nonunion (5.0%) compared to tobacco or cannabis use alone (P < .001). Multivariate analysis identified cannabis-only use (odds ratio [OR] 1.25), tobacco-only use (OR 2.17), and concurrent tobacco and cannabis use (OR 1.78) as risk factors for infection within the first postoperative year. Similarly, cannabis-only use (OR 1.47), tobacco-only use (OR 1.92), and concurrent tobacco and cannabis use (OR 2.52) were associated with an increased risk of malunion. CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis use is associated with an elevated risk of infection and malunion following operative management of a distal radius fracture. Concomitant use of cannabis and tobacco poses an elevated risk of nonunion and malunion compared to tobacco use alone.

Open versus arthroscopic elbow arthrolysis for primary osteoarthritis: A comparison of demographics and complications at two years.

Introduction: Open techniques have traditionally been utilized in the surgical management of elbow osteoarthritis (OA). However, advances in elbow arthroscopy, in conjunction with the movement towards minimally invasive surgery, have led to an increase in the utilization of an arthroscopic approach. The primary aim of this investigation was to compare demographics and complication rates between patients undergoing open or arthroscopic arthrolysis for elbow OA with a secondary objective of identifying risk factors for infection with each treatment. Methods: A retrospective review of a private, all-payer database was performed to identify patients undergoing either open (n = 1482) or arthroscopic (n = 2341) arthrolysis for elbow osteoarthritis. The primary outcome was 2-year complications, which included infection, wound complications, and nerve injuries. Categorical variables were compared utilizing chi-square analyses, while continuous variables were compared using independent sample t-tests. Odd ratios (OR) were ascertained to quantify the risk attributed to open arthrolysis compared to arthroscopic. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess risk factors for infection following open or arthroscopic arthrolysis of an elbow with OA. Results: Age was significantly higher in the open cohort (55 ± 13.4 years) compared to the arthroscopic cohort (52 ± 13.1 years) (p < 0.001). The open cohort was more likely to be female (32.0 vs. 22.9%, p < 0.001) and have a Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) greater than three (9.2 vs. 7.1%, p < 0.001). Open procedures were associated with an increased risk of nerve injury (OR: 1.50) and wound complications (OR: 7.70) compared to arthroscopic arthrolysis. Multivariable logistic regression identified open procedures as a risk factor for infection (OR: 11.15). Moreover, diabetes (OR: 1.48), chronic kidney disease (OR: 1.89) and tobacco use (OR: 2.29) were found as risk factors for infection among the open cohort. Conclusions: This study found patients undergoing open arthrolysis of OA to be older and have a greater number of medical comorbidities compared to those undergoing arthroscopic arthrolysis. Open arthrolysis was associated with an increased rate of infection, nerve injury and wound complications compared to arthroscopic arthrolysis. After controlling for age and comorbidities with multivariable logistic regression, open arthrolysis remained a risk factor for infection. Arthroscopic elbow arthrolysis is associated with a lower risk of complications, including infection and may be favored for the management of OA of the elbow. Level of Evidence: III (retrospective cohort study).

The Effect of Patients' Understanding of Sling Necessity and Home Assistance on Sling Wear After Shoulder Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative education and socioeconomic factors influence patient behavior. Recent evidence has suggested that sling compliance is associated with improved outcomes after shoulder surgery; it is important to investigate factors that influence sling compliance. PURPOSE: To determine the associations between postoperative sling wear and patients' understanding of sling necessity, postoperative home assistance, and social deprivation. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A total of 66 patients were prospectively enrolled from 2018 to 2020 if they were ≥18 years of age and undergoing shoulder surgery requiring a sling for at least 1 month postoperatively. Sling wear was measured using a temperature-sensing device. At 6 weeks postoperatively, patients' understanding for sling necessity was determined by their response to a question on the Medical Adherence Measure questionnaire, "Why did you have to wear a shoulder sling?" The Patient Understanding Grading Scale (PUGS) was developed to quantify patient responses. PUGS was graded 1 to 3, with grade 1 corresponding to the least technical knowledge. Patient characteristics, social deprivation (Area Deprivation Index [ADI]), and home assistance were additionally analyzed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between patients when stratified by PUGS grade. Multivariable linear regression analysis for total hours of sling wear per week showed that patients with PUGS grade 2 (ß, 48.2 hours; P = .007) and grade 3 (ß, 59.5 hours; P = .003) wore their slings significantly more than grade 1 patients. Patients with home assistance had significantly greater day hours (73.5 ± 33.0 vs 44.0 ± 24.5 hours; P = .037) of sling wear per week, but there was no difference in night sling hours. Patients older than 60 years wore their slings significantly more, while men and those with a higher body mass index (BMI) wore their slings significantly less. ADI was not significantly associated with sling wear. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that patients with greater understanding for sling necessity, those with home assistance, and patients >60 years have greater sling wear, while male patients and those with a higher BMI have lower sling compliance. ADI was not a significant contributor.

Glenoid Bone Loss Pattern in Patients With Posterior Instability Versus Anterior Instability: A Matched Cohort Study.

Background: The pattern of glenoid bone loss (GBL) in anterior glenohumeral instability is well described. It was recognized recently that posterior GBL after instability has a posteroinferior pattern. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare GBL patterns in a matched cohort of patients with anterior versus posterior glenohumeral instability. The hypothesis was that the GBL pattern in posterior instability would be more inferior than the GBL pattern in anterior instability. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: In this multicenter retrospective study, 28 patients with posterior instability were matched with 28 patients with anterior instability by age, sex and number of instability events. GBL location was defined using a clockface model. Obliquity was defined as the angle between the long axis of the glenoid and a line tangent to the GBL. Superior and inferior GBL were measured as areas and defined relative to the equator. The primary outcome was the 2-dimensional characterization of posterior versus anterior GBL. The secondary outcome was a comparison of the posterior GBL patterns in traumatic and atraumatic instability mechanisms in an expanded cohort of 42 patients. Results: The mean age of the matched cohorts (n = 56) was 25.2 ± 9.87 years. The median obliquity of GBL was 27.53° (interquartile range [IQR], 18.83°-47.38°) in the posterior cohort and 9.28° (IQR, 6.68°-15.75°) in the anterior cohort (P < .001). The mean superior-to-inferior bone loss ratio was 0.48 ± 0.51 in the posterior cohort and 0.80 ± 0.55 (P = .032) in the anterior cohort. In the expanded posterior instability cohort (n = 42), patients with traumatic injury mechanism (n = 22), had a similar GBL obliquity compared to patients with an atraumatic injury mechanism (n = 20) (mean, 27.73° [95% CI, 20.26°-35.20°] vs 32.20° [95% CI, 21.27°-43.14°], respectively) (P = .49). Conclusion: Posterior GBL occurred more inferiorly and at an increased obliquity compared with anterior GBL. This pattern is consistent for traumatic and atraumatic posterior GBL. Bone loss along the equator may not be the most reliable predictor of posterior instability, and critical bone loss may be reached more rapidly than a model of loss along the equator may predict.

Are outcomes after fixation of distal humerus coronal shear fractures affected by surgical approach? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Surgical management of coronal shear fractures of the distal humerus is associated with a high rate of complications. Several surgical approaches have been described to address these fractures. The complication profiles associated with each approach have not previously been compared, and that is the aim of the present study. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify all studies addressing coronal shear fractures of the distal humerus published between 2001 and January 2022. Of the 189 articles identified, 45 met the criteria for inclusion. Summaries of continuous data were calculated using the inverse variance method for pooling with random effects models. Fixed effects model estimates were reported unless significant heterogeneity was observed between studies. A subset of 6 studies reported the surgical approach and complications associated with the operative management of capitellar shear fractures without posterior comminution. The complication profiles of the extended lateral and anterolateral approaches were compared. Results: The 45 studies included yielded 899 patients. The average age was 44.9 years (95% confidence interval [CI]: 39.7 to 50.2). The fracture type was Dubberley A in 38% (n = 342), Dubberley B in 33% (n = 300), and not reported in the remainder. The reoperation rate was 13.8% (95% CI: 9.6% to 19.5%). Pooled complication rates included post-traumatic arthritis in 21.2% (95% CI: 18.0% to 24.9%), heterotopic ossification in 12.0% (95% CI: 9.2% to 15.6%), nerve injury in 7.8% (95% CI: 5.6% to 10.9%), and avascular necrosis in 7.4% (95% CI: 5.3% to 10.2%). The complication rate in noncomparative studies was 25.8% following the lateral approach and 16.7% following the anterolateral approach. Reported complications following the anterolateral approach were pain (9.5%) and nerve injury (7.1%). Reported complications following the lateral approach included arthritis (9.1%), heterotopic ossification (6.1%), avascular necrosis (4.5%), instability (3.0%), nerve injury (1.5%), and wound issues (1.5%). Discussion and Conclusion: Complications are common following operative management of capitellar shear fractures. In noncomparative studies, the complication rate was higher following the extended lateral compared to the anterolateral approach for Dubberley A fractures. Additionally, the reported complications following the extended lateral approach may impact long-term outcomes. Insufficient comparative evidence currently exists to recommend one approach over the other. High-quality comparative studies are needed.

Low Rate of Complications Following Intramedullary Headless Compression Screw Fixation of Metacarpal Fractures.

Background: There has been a recent increase in the use of headless compression screws for fixation of metacarpal neck and shaft fractures as they offer several advantages, and minimal complications have been reported. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical complications and their solutions following retrograde intramedullary headless compression screw fixation of metacarpal fractures. We describe complications and the approach to their management. Methods: We performed a multicenter case series through retrospective review of all patients treated with intramedullary headless screw fixation of metacarpal fractures by 3 fellowship-trained hand surgeons. Patient demographics, implant used, type of complication, pre- and postoperative radiographs, operative reports, and sequelae were reviewed for each case. We defined complications as infection, loss of fixation, hardware failure, malrotation, nonunion, malunion, metal allergy, and any repeat surgical intervention. Results: Four complications (2.5%) were identified through the review of 160 total metacarpal fractures. One complication was a nickel allergy, one was a broken screw after repeat trauma, and 2 patients had bent intramedullary screws. Screw removal in 3 patients was simple and without complications or persistent limitations. One bent screw with a refracture was left in place. No serious complications were seen. Conclusion: Intramedullary screw fixation of metacarpal fractures is safe with a low incidence of complications (2.5%) that can be safely and effectively managed.