Subchondral Bone Alignment in Osteochondral Allograft Transplants for Large Oval Defects of the Medial Femoral Condyle: Comparison of Lateral versus Medial Femoral Condyle Donors.

OBJECTIVE: Supply-demand mismatch of medial femoral condyle (MFC) osteochondral allografts (OCAs) remains a rate-limiting factor in the treatment of osteochondral defects of the femoral condyle. Surface contour mapping was used to determine whether a contralateral lateral femoral condyle (LFC) versus ipsilateral MFC OCA differs in the alignment of donor:native subchondral bone for large osteochondral defects of the MFC. DESIGN: Thirty fresh-frozen human femoral condyles were matched by tibial width into 10 groups of 3 condyles (MFC recipient, MFC donor, and LFC donor) each for 3 cartilage surgeons (90 condyles). The recipient MFC was imaged using nano-computed tomography scan. Donor oval grafts were harvested from each matched condyle and transplanted into a 17 mm × 36 mm defect created in the recipient condyle. Following the first transplant, the recipient condyle was imaged and superimposed on the native condyle nano-CT scan. The donor plug was removed and the process repeated for the other donor. Surface height deviation and circumferential step-off height deviation were compared between native and donor subchondral bone surfaces for each transplant. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in mean subchondral bone surface deviation (LFC = 0.87 mm, MFC = 0.76 mm, P = 0.07) nor circumferential step-off height (LFC = 0.93 mm, MFC = 0.85 mm, P = 0.09) between the LFC and MFC plugs. There were no significant differences in outcomes between surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in subchondral bone circumferential step-off or surface deviation between ipsilateral MFC and contralateral LFC oval-shaped OCAs for 17 mm × 36 mm defects of the MFC.

Osteochondral Allografts for Large Oval Defects of the Medial Femoral Condyle: A Comparison of Single Lateral Versus Medial Femoral Condyle Oval Grafts Versus 2 Overlapping Circular Grafts.

BACKGROUND: Studies have demonstrated the acceptability of using a contralateral nonorthotopic lateral femoral condyle (LFC) graft for a circular medial femoral condyle (MFC) osteochondral defect up to 20 to 25 mm in diameter. Larger oblong defects can now be managed using either overlapping circle grafts or a single oblong-shaped osteochondral allograft (OCA). PURPOSE: To determine if an oblong contralateral nonorthotopic LFC OCA can attain an acceptable surface contour match compared with an oblong ipsilateral MFC OCA or an overlapping circle technique for large oblong defects of the MFC. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: A total of 120 fresh-frozen human femoral condyles were matched by tibial width into 30 groups of 4 condyles (1 recipient MFC, 3 donor condyles). The recipient MFC was initially imaged using nano-computed tomography (nano-CT). A 17 × 36-mm oblong defect was created in the recipient MFC. Overall, 3 donor groups were formed: MFC oblong, LFC nonorthotopic oblong, LFC or MFC overlapping circles. After each transplant, the recipient condyle underwent nano-CT and was digitally reconstructed, which was superimposed on the initial nano-CT scan of the native recipient condyle. Dragonfly 3D software was used to determine the root mean square (RMS) of both the surface height deviation and the circumferential step-off height deviation between the native and donor cartilage surfaces for each graft. RESULTS: RMS surface height deviations were as follows: 0.59 mm for MFC oblong grafts, 0.58 mm for LFC oblong grafts, and 0.78 mm for overlapping circle grafts. The MFC and LFC oblong grafts had significantly less surface height deviation than the overlapping circle grafts (P = .004 and P = .002, respectively). RMS step-off height deviations were as follows: 0.68 mm for MFC oblong grafts, 0.70 mm for LFC oblong grafts, and 0.85 mm for overlapping circle grafts. The MFC and LFC oblong grafts had significantly less step-off height deviation than the overlapping circle grafts (P < .001 and P = .002, respectively). The majority of this difference was on the medial segment of the overlapping circle grafts. CONCLUSION: Oblong ipsilateral MFC OCAs and oblong contralateral nonorthotopic LFC OCAs produced a significantly better surface contour match to the native MFC than overlapping circle grafts for oblong defects 17 × 36 mm in size. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Size-matched contralateral nonorthotopic LFC grafts are acceptable for MFC defects, which may allow for a quicker match, earlier patient care, and less wastage of valuable donor tissue.

Metrics of OsteoChondral Allografts (MOCA) Group Consensus Statements on the Use of Viable Osteochondral Allograft.

BACKGROUND: Osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation has evolved into a first-line treatment for large chondral and osteochondral defects, aided by advancements in storage protocols and a growing body of clinical evidence supporting successful clinical outcomes and long-term survivorship. Despite the body of literature supporting OCAs, there still remains controversy and debate in the surgical application of OCA, especially where high-level evidence is lacking. PURPOSE: To develop consensus among an expert group with extensive clinical and scientific experience in OCA, addressing controversies in the treatment of chondral and osteochondral defects with OCA transplantation. STUDY DESIGN: Consensus statement. METHODS: A focus group of clinical experts on OCA cartilage restoration participated in a 3-round modified Delphi process to generate a list of statements and establish consensus. Questions and statements were initially developed on specific topics that lack scientific evidence and lead to debate and controversy in the clinical community. In-person discussion occurred where statements were not agreed on after 2 rounds of voting. After final voting, the percentage of agreement and level of consensus were characterized. A systematic literature review was performed, and the level of evidence and grade were established for each statement. RESULTS: Seventeen statements spanning surgical technique, graft matching, indications, and rehabilitation reached consensus after the final round of voting. Of the 17 statements that reached consensus, 11 received unanimous (100%) agreement, and 6 received strong (80%-99%) agreement. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of this study led to the establishment of consensus statements that provide guidance on surgical and perioperative management of OCAs. The findings also provided insights on topics requiring more research or high-quality studies to further establish consensus and provide stronger evidence.

An Expert Consensus Statement on the Management of Large Chondral and Osteochondral Defects in the Patellofemoral Joint.

BACKGROUND: Cartilage lesions of the patellofemoral joint constitute a frequent abnormality. Patellofemoral conditions are challenging to treat because of complex biomechanics and morphology. PURPOSE: To develop a consensus statement on the functional anatomy, indications, donor graft considerations, surgical treatment, and rehabilitation for the management of large chondral and osteochondral defects in the patellofemoral joint using a modified Delphi technique. STUDY DESIGN: Consensus statement. METHODS: A working group of 4 persons generated a list of statements related to the functional anatomy, indications, donor graft considerations, surgical treatment, and rehabilitation for the management of large chondral and osteochondral defects in the patellofemoral joint to form the basis of an initial survey for rating by a group of experts. The Metrics of Osteochondral Allografts (MOCA) expert group (composed of 28 high-volume cartilage experts) was surveyed on 3 occasions to establish a consensus on the statements. In addition to assessing agreement for each included statement, experts were invited to propose additional statements for inclusion or to suggest modifications of existing statements with each round. Predefined criteria were used to refine statement lists after each survey round. Statements reaching a consensus in round 3 were included within the final consensus document. RESULTS: A total of 28 experts (100% response rate) completed 3 rounds of surveys. After 3 rounds, 36 statements achieved a consensus, with over 75% agreement and less than 20% disagreement. A consensus was reached in 100.00% of the statements relating to functional anatomy of the patellofemoral joint, 88.24% relating to surgical indications, 100.00% relating to surgical technical aspects, and 100.00% relating to rehabilitation, with an overall consensus of 95.5%. CONCLUSION: This study established a strong expert consensus document relating to the functional anatomy, surgical indications, donor graft considerations for osteochondral allografts, surgical technical aspects, and rehabilitation concepts for the management of large chondral and osteochondral defects in the patellofemoral joint. Further research is required to clinically validate the established consensus statements and better understand the precise indications for surgery as well as which techniques and graft processing/preparation methods should be used based on patient- and lesion-specific factors.

The Rotator Interval of the Shoulder: Implications in the Treatment of Shoulder Instability.

Biomechanical studies have shown that repair or plication of rotator interval (RI) ligamentous and capsular structures decreases glenohumeral joint laxity in various directions. Clinical outcomes studies have reported successful outcomes after repair or plication of these structures in patients undergoing shoulder stabilization procedures. Recent studies describing arthroscopic techniques to address these structures have intensified the debate over the potential benefit of these procedures as well as highlighted the differences between open and arthroscopic RI procedures. The purposes of this study were to review the structures of the RI and their contribution to shoulder instability, to discuss the biomechanical and clinical effects of repair or plication of rotator interval structures, and to describe the various surgical techniques used for these procedures and outcomes.

Osteochondral allograft transplant to the medial femoral condyle using a medial or lateral femoral condyle allograft: is there a difference in graft sources?

BACKGROUND: Osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation is an effective treatment for defects in the medial femoral condyle (MFC), but the procedure is limited by a shortage of grafts. Lateral femoral condyles (LFCs) differ in geometry from MFCs but may be a suitable graft source. The difference between articular surface locations of the knee can be evaluated with micro-computed tomography imaging and 3-dimensional image analysis. HYPOTHESIS: LFC OCAs inserted into MFC lesions can provide a cartilage surface match comparable with those provided by MFC allografts. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Twenty MFCs and 10 LFCs were divided into 3 groups: 10 MFC recipients (MFCr), 10 MFC donors (MFCd), and 10 LFC donors (LFCd). A 20-mm defect was created in the weightbearing portion of the MFCr. Two grafts, 1 MFCd and 1 LFCd, were implanted sequentially into each MFCr. Micro-computed tomography (µCT) images of the MFCr were acquired and analyzed to compare the topography of the original recipient site with the MFCd- and LFCd-repaired sites. Three-dimensional transformations were defined to register the defect site in the 3 scans of each MFCr. Vertical deviations from each voxel of the graft cartilage surface, relative to the intact recipient cartilage surface, were calculated and assessed as root mean square deviation and percentage graft area that was proud, sunk, and within the "acceptable" distance (±1.00 mm). The effect of repair (with MFC vs with LFC) on each of the surface match parameters is presented as mean ± SD and was assessed by t test: height deviation over area (root mean square, mm), graft area acceptable (%), area unacceptably proud (%), area unacceptably sunk (%), step-off height over circumference (root mean square, mm), graft circumference acceptable (%), circumference unacceptably proud (%), and circumference unacceptably sunk (%). Percentage data were arcsin transformed before statistical testing. An alpha level of 0.05 was used to conclude if variations were statistically significant. RESULTS: MFCr defects were filled with both orthotopic MFCd and nonorthotopic LFCd. Registered µCT images of the MFCr illustrate the cartilage surface contour in the sagittal and coronal planes, in the original intact condyle, as well as after OCA repairs. Specimen-specific surface color maps for the MFCr after implant of the MFCd and after implant of LFCd were generally similar, with some deviation near the edges. On average, the MFCr site exhibited a typical contour, and the MFCd and LFCd were slightly elevated. Both types of OCA-MFCd and LFCd-matched well, showing overall height deviations of 0.63 mm for area and 0.47 mm for step-off, with no significant difference between MFCd and LFCd (P = .92 and .57, respectively) and acceptable deviation based on area (87.6% overall) and step-off (96.7% overall), with no significant difference between MFCd and LFCd (P = .87 and .22, respectively). A small portion of the implant was proud (12.1% of area and 2.6% of circumference step-off height), with no significant difference between MFCd and LFCd (P = .26 and .27, respectively). A very small portion of the implant area and edge was sunk (0.3% of area and 0.6% of circumference), with no significant difference between MFCd and LFCd (P = .29 and .86, respectively). CONCLUSION/CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The achievement of excellent OCA surface match with an MFCd or LFCd graft into the common MFCr site suggests that nonorthotopic LFC OCAs are acceptable graft options for MFC defects.

Posterior instability of the shoulder: diagnosis and management.

Recurrent posterior instability of the shoulder can be difficult to diagnose and technically challenging to treat. Although not as common as anterior instability, recurrent posterior shoulder instability is prevalent among certain demographic and sporting groups, and may be overlooked if one is not aware of the typical examination and radiographic findings. The diagnosis itself can be difficult as patients typically present with vague or confusing symptoms, and treatment has evolved from open to arthroscopic surgical techniques. This article is intended to review the anatomy and biomechanics associated with posterior shoulder instability, to discuss the pathogenesis and presentation of posterior instability, and to describe the variety of treatment options and clinical results.

The addition of rotator interval closure after arthroscopic repair of either anterior or posterior shoulder instability: effect on glenohumeral translation and range of motion.

BACKGROUND: Although the use of rotator interval closure is frequently advocated as a useful supplement to shoulder instability repairs, the addition of a rotator interval closure after arthroscopic instability repair has not been fully investigated. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to investigate whether a rotator interval closure improves glenohumeral stability in an anterior and posterior instability shoulder model. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Fourteen fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulder specimens were dissected free of soft tissues, leaving the rotator cuff intact with simulated cuff loading. All specimens were mounted in a custom testing apparatus using infrared sensors to document glenohumeral translation and rotation. The specimens were then tested for stability in the following order: vented/subluxated state, after arthroscopic anterior (Group 1; 7 specimens) or posterior (Group 2; 7 specimens) instability repair with suture anchors, and then after rotator interval closure. For each of the 3 testing conditions, the following were measured: (1) external and internal rotation at neutral, (2) external and internal rotation at 90 degrees of abduction, (3) posterior and anterior translation at neutral rotation (15 N and 25 N), (4) anterior translation at 90 degrees of abduction and external rotation (Group 1; 15 N and 25 N), (5) posterior translation at 90 degrees of flexion and internal rotation (Group 2; 15 N and 25 N), and (6) sulcus testing in neutral (7.5 N). RESULTS: Posterior stability was only improved after anchor capsulolabral repair (8.0 to 5.0 mm; P = .017, 25 N), but there was no improvement after rotator interval closure (5.0 to 4.6 mm; P = .453). However, anterior stability was improved after capsulolabral repair (8.6 to 4.0 mm; P = .016, 25 N) and also improved further by rotator interval closure (4.0 to 2.4 mm; P = .007). The mean loss of external rotation was significantly increased by the addition of the rotator interval closure in both neutral and abducted glenohumeral positions, with a mean external rotation loss of 28 degrees in neutral (P = .013). The addition of a rotator interval closure did not improve sulcus stability (P = .4). CONCLUSION: The addition of an arthroscopic rotator interval closure after posterior capsulolabral repair did not improve posterior stability; however, anterior stability was improved further after a rotator interval closure. Inferior stability was not improved. Arthroscopic rotator interval closure significantly decreased external rotation at both neutral and abducted arm positions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Arthroscopic closure may be beneficial in certain cases of anterior shoulder instability; however, posterior instability was not improved. Predictable losses of external rotation after rotator interval closure are of concern.

Arthroscopic treatment of osteochondral lesions of the distal tibia.

BACKGROUND: Osteochondral lesions of the tibia are much less frequent than those of the talus, and treatment guidelines have not been established. We hypothesized that arthroscopic treatment methods used for osteochondral lesion of the talus would also be effective for those of the distal tibia. METHODS: A review of 880 consecutive ankle arthroscopies identified 23 patients (2.6%) with osteochondral lesions of the distal tibia. Four patients were excluded because of concomitant acute ankle fractures requiring open reduction and internal fixation and two were lost to followup, leaving 17 in the study. The mean age was 38 (19 to 71) years. Six (35%) had osteochondral lesions of the tibia and talus; 11 had isolated lesions of the distal tibia. Treatment included excision, curettage, and abrasion arthroplasty in all patients. Five patients had transmalleolar drilling of the lesion, two had microfracture, and two had iliac bone grafting. At last followup, patients were evaluated with a questionnaire, physical examination, and ankle radiographs. RESULTS: Mean followup was 44 (24 to 99) months. Preoperatively, the median American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot score was 52; postoperatively, it was 87. Using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test to compare preoperative and postoperative scores, there was significant improvement in the ankle-hindfoot score postoperatively (p < 0.001). Seven patients had excellent results, seven had good results, one had a fair result, and two had poor results. CONCLUSIONS: Osteochondral lesions of the distal tibia present a challenge to the orthopedic surgeon. Arthroscopic treatment by means of debridement, curettage, abrasion arthroplasty, and, in some patients, transmalleolar drilling, microfracture, or iliac crest bone grafting, resulted in excellent and good results in 14 of 17 patients at medium-term followup.

Arthroscopic versus open rotator interval closure: biomechanical evaluation of stability and motion.

PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to investigate the differences between open and arthroscopic closure of the rotator interval (RI) on glenohumeral translation and range of motion. We also sought to determine if the addition of either an open or arthroscopic RI closure increases stability of the shoulder. METHODS: Fourteen fresh-frozen (10 paired) cadaveric shoulder specimens were mounted in a custom testing apparatus, and glenohumeral translation and rotation were obtained by using an optoelectric tracking system (Optotrak Certus; Northern Digital, Ontario, Canada). Specimens were randomly allocated to either open (n = 7) or arthroscopic (n = 7) plication of the RI. The following were measured first with an intact and vented specimen and subsequently after an RI closure using either open or arthroscopic techniques: (1) range of motion in neutral and 90 degrees abduction; (2) anterior and posterior translation at neutral rotation; (3) anterior translation at 90 degrees abduction with external rotation; and (4) posterior translation at 90 degrees flexion with internal rotation. RESULTS: Posterior stability was not improved from the intact state by either open (1.0-mm change) or arthroscopic (0.1-mm change) repair. The sulcus stability was improved in the open group (5.7 mm to 2.9 mm, P = .028), but not arthroscopically (5.1 to 4.1 mm, P = .499). Neutral anterior stability was improved after open repair (7.2 to 2.6 mm, P = .018), but not arthroscopically (2.3 to 2.4 mm, P = 0.5). However, anterior stability in external rotation (ER) at 90 degrees abduction was improved in the arthroscopic repair group (5.5 to 3.1 mm, P = .006). The mean loss of ER in neutral was greater in the open group (40.8 degrees) versus the arthroscopic group (24.4 degrees, P = .0038). The arthroscopic group showed an 11.7 degrees loss of ER in 90 degree abduction (P = .018) versus the open group loss of 4.8 degrees. There were no significant differences in loss of IR in either neutral or 90 degree abduction. CONCLUSIONS: Posterior stability was not improved by either open or arthroscopic rotator interval repair, and sulcus stability only improved with the open technique. Anterior stability in neutral was improved after open repair and in the arthroscopic repair group with the arm abducted. There was a large loss of external rotation with both techniques. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study suggests that arthroscopic RI closure adds little to the overall posterior and inferior stability of the shoulder joint, although anterior stability may be improved. There is a potentially large loss of external rotation after either repair method.

Arthroscopic stabilization in patients with an inverted pear glenoid: results in patients with bone loss of the anterior glenoid.

BACKGROUND: Recent literature has demonstrated that the success rates of arthroscopic stabilization of glenohumeral instability deteriorate in patients with an anteroinferior glenoid bone deficiency, also known as the "inverted pear" glenoid. PURPOSE: This study was conducted to assess the outcomes of arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent anterior shoulder instability in patients with a mean anteroinferior glenoid bone deficiency of 25% (range, 20%-30%). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Twenty-one of 23 patients (91% follow-up) undergoing arthroscopic stabilization surgery and noted to have a bony deficiency of the anteroinferior glenoid of 20% to 30% were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 34 months (range, 26-47). The mean age was 25 years (range, 20-34); 2 patients were female and 19 were male. All patients were treated with a primary anterior arthroscopic stabilization using a mean of 3.2 suture anchors (range, 3-4). Eleven patients had a bony Bankart that was incorporated into the repair; 10 had no bone fragment and were considered attritional bone loss. Outcomes were assessed using the Rowe score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Score, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) Index. Findings of recurrent instability and dislocation events were documented. RESULTS: Two patients (9.5%) experienced symptoms of recurrent subluxation, and 1 (4.8%) sustained a recurrent dislocation that required revision open surgery. The mean postoperative outcomes scores were as follows: SANE = 88.1 (range, 65-100; standard deviation [SD] 9.0); Rowe = 85.2 (range, 55-100; SD 14.1); ASES Score = 93.1 (range, 78-100; SD 5.3); and WOSI Index = 398 (82% of normal; range, 30-1175; SD 264). No patient with a bony fragment experienced a recurrent subluxation or dislocation, and mean outcomes scores for patients with a bony fragment were better than those with no bony fragment (P = .08). No patient required medical discharge from the military for his or her shoulder condition. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent instability, even in the presence of a significant bony defect of the glenoid, can yield a stable shoulder; however, outcomes are not as predictable especially in attritional bone loss cases. Longer-term follow-up is needed to see if these results hold up over time.

The modified Bristow procedure for anterior shoulder instability: 26-year outcomes in Naval Academy midshipmen.

BACKGROUND: Many procedures have been proposed for the correction of anterior shoulder instability. Some of these procedures address the problem anatomically, such as the Bankart procedure, and some prevent instability nonanatomically, such as the Bristow-Latarjet procedure. A modified Bristow procedure was the procedure of choice for anterior shoulder instability among midshipmen at the United States Naval Academy from 1975 to 1979. HYPOTHESIS: The modified Bristow procedure for anterior shoulder instability provides good shoulder function and stability in the long term. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: There were 52 shoulders in 49 patients reviewed at a mean follow-up of 26.4 years. The Rowe score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index were used to assess outcomes. RESULTS: The mean Rowe score was 81.8 (range, 5-100), and the mean Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score was 82.9 (range, 30-100), with an overall Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation of 71.2% (37 of 52 shoulders) rated as good and excellent. The mean Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index was 376 of 2100 (range, 0-1560). Overall, recurrent instability occurred in 8 of 52 shoulders (15.4%), with recurrent dislocation in 5 shoulders (9.6%) and recurrent subluxation in 3 shoulders (5.8%). The mean time to recurrent dislocation was 7.0 years. CONCLUSION: This study represents the longest follow-up in the literature of the modified Bristow procedure. The authors have shown nearly 70% good and excellent results and recurrent instability comparable with other long-term follow-up studies of open instability procedures.

Twenty-six-year results after Broström procedure for chronic lateral ankle instability.

BACKGROUND: The procedure described by Broström has been used to address chronic lateral ankle instability; the long-term results of this procedure have not been reported. HYPOTHESIS: The Broström procedure provides good results over the long term for active patients with chronic lateral ankle instability. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Thirty-one male patients (32 ankles) who underwent the Broström procedure for chronic lateral ankle instability while enrolled as students at the United States Naval Academy were identified. Each patient was mailed a questionnaire that included a functional outcome measure as described by Roos et al, a score described by Good et al, and a single-number ankle functional assessment. The mean age was 20.7 years (range, 18-23 years) at the time of operation. A functional outcome score was completed on each patient, with a mean follow-up of 26.3 years (range, 24.6-27.9 years). RESULTS: The follow-up included 22 of the 31 original patients. The mean numeric score for overall ankle function was 91.2 of 100 (standard deviation, 10.2). The foot and ankle outcome score (described by Roos et al) was 92.0 (92%; standard deviation, 12.8) averaged over 5 functional areas. Ninety-one percent of the patients described their ankle function as good or excellent using the scale devised by Good et al. CONCLUSION: The long-term results of the Broström procedure for chronic lateral ankle instability are excellent with 26-year follow-up.

Arthroscopic treatment of posterior shoulder instability: results in 33 patients.

BACKGROUND: Posterior shoulder instability is a relatively rare condition and a surgical challenge. Arthroscopic techniques have allowed for a potential improvement as well as diagnosis and management of this condition. PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization and to evaluate preoperative and intraoperative variables as predictors of success. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Thirty-three consecutive patients with a mean age of 25 years (range, 19-34 years) who underwent posterior arthroscopic shoulder stabilization with suture anchors (mean, 3 anchors) or suture capsulolabral plication (mean, 5.3 stitches) or both were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 39.1 months (range, 22-60 months). Shoulder outcomes rating scores were determined using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Rating Scale, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, the Subjective Patient Shoulder Evaluation, and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. RESULTS: There were 7 failures: 4 for recurrent instability and 3 for symptoms of pain. Overall, outcomes scores demonstrated mean values of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Rating Scale of 94.6, Subjective Patient Shoulder Evaluation of 20.0, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index of 389.4 (81.5% of normal), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation of 87.5. Patients with voluntary instability demonstrated worse outcomes (P = .025), and those with prior surgery of the shoulder also did worse (P = .02). CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic treatment of posterior shoulder instability is an effective means to improve symptoms associated with recurrent posterior subluxation of the shoulder. It can provide predictable success in the setting of unidirectional, nonvoluntary posterior instability without prior surgery.

Long-term evaluation of the Roux-Elmslie-Trillat procedure for patellar instability: a 26-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Few published articles exist reporting the long-term evaluation of the Roux-Elmslie-Trillat procedure. PURPOSE: To assess the long-term effect of the Roux-Elmslie-Trillat procedure in preventing recurrent subluxation and dislocation of the patella. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Eighteen patients who underwent the Roux-Elmslie-Trillat procedure for dislocation or subluxation of the patella were identified from a group previously evaluated at a mean follow-up of 3 years. The prevalence of recurrent subluxation or dislocation at a mean follow-up of 26 years was compared with the prevalence reported at the mean follow-up of 3 years. Although not the focus of this study, Cox functional scores were obtained from the smaller group and compared with the results at the 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: Seven percent (95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.32) of the patients had recurrent subluxation at 26 years compared with 7% (95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.13) of the study population reported at 3 years (P = 1.00). Fifty-four percent (95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.79) rated their affected knee as good or excellent at 26 years compared with 73% (95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.81) of the larger study population reported at 3 years (P = .14). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of recurrent subluxation and dislocation in patients with patellofemoral malalignment who underwent the Roux-Elmslie-Trillat procedure for dislocation or subluxation of the patella is similar at 3 and 26 years after the procedure. The long-term functional status of the affected knee in patients who underwent the Roux-Elmslie-Trillat procedure declined.

Early screw fixation versus casting in the treatment of acute Jones fractures.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable variability in the literature concerning the optimal treatment of acute Jones fractures. HYPOTHESIS: Early surgical fixation of acute Jones fractures will result in shorter times to union and return to athletics compared with cast treatment. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled clinical trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: Eighteen patients were randomized to cast treatment, and 19 patients were randomized to screw fixation. Success of treatment and the times to union and return to sports were calculated for each patient. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 25.3 months (range, 15-42 months). Eight of 18 (44%) in the cast group were considered treatment failures: 5 nonunions, 1 delayed union, and 2 refractures. One of 19 patients in the surgery group was considered a treatment failure. For the surgery group, the median times to union and return to sports were 7.5 and 8.0 weeks, respectively. For the cast group, the median times were 14.5 and 15.0 weeks, respectively. The Mann-Whitney test showed a statistically significant difference between the groups in both parameters, with P < 001. CONCLUSION: There is a high incidence (44%) of failure after cast treatment of acute Jones fractures. Early screw fixation results in quicker times to union and return to sports compared with cast treatment.

Effectiveness of an acetabular positioning device in primary total hip arthroplasty.

To evaluate the efficacy of a commercially available acetabular positioning device, we performed a prospective evaluation of 40 consecutive patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty. All surgery was performed by the same surgeon, in the same operating room, and on the same operating table. The acetabular positioning device was designed to place the component in 45 degrees of abduction. At 6 weeks, all radiographs were evaluated by 3 investigators not involved with the surgery. Each radiograph was evaluated by each reviewer on 3 separate occasions, blinded to the findings of the other reviewer to assess interobserver and intraobserver variability. The mean cup abduction angle was 42.1 degrees, with a range from 23 degrees to 57 degrees (SD 8.3 degrees). Intraobserver and interobserver variability were 0.2 and 0.3 degrees, respectively. The findings of this study demonstrate a wide variability in acetabular cup placement in primary total hip arthroplasty. We believe this is due to movement of the pelvis, which may occur during preparation, draping, and retracting during surgery. We feel surgeons should not rely solely on positioning devices when implanting the acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty. Identification of bone landmarks and determination of superolateral implant coverage noted on preoperative templating is advocated to improve the precision of component position.