Arthroscopic Anatomic Glenoid Reconstruction Hardware Removal.

Recurrent shoulder instability is associated with bone loss. Distal tibial allograft reconstruction of the glenoid is an accepted technique for managing bone loss. Bone remodeling occurs within the first 2 years postoperatively. This can lead to prominent instrumentation, particularly anteriorly near the subscapularis tendon, causing pain and weakness. We provide a description of arthroscopic instrumentation removal for prominent anterior screws following anatomic glenoid reconstruction with distal tibial allograft.

Dual mini-fragment plate fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures is biomechanically equivalent to anatomic pre-contoured plating.

OBJECTIVES: To biomechanically compare the stiffness of midshaft synthetic clavicle osteotomies fixed with either superior anatomic pre-contoured locking plates, anterior anatomic pre-contoured locking plates, or short-segment dual orthogonal mini-plate fixation. DESIGN AND SETTING: Controlled laboratory study. Specimens Twenty-one synthetic pre-osteotomized clavicles were separated into three groups: superior plating, anterior plating, or dual-plating. Each clavicle was sequentially tested in non-destructive cycles of axial compression, three-point bending, and torsion. Load and displacement were recorded. Stiffness was calculated. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found between construct stiffness during axial compression, three-point bending, or torsional testing. One superior plated clavicle suffered catastrophic failure during axial compression. One dual mini-fragment plated clavicle suffered catastrophic failure during torsion. CONCLUSIONS: Orthogonal dual mini-fragment fixation of transverse clavicle fractures is biomechanically similar to superior and anterior pre-contoured anatomic locking plate fixation. No statistically significant differences in construct stiffness were found in axial compression, three-point bending, or torsion testing. Further clinical research is required to determine the long-term stability of dual mini-fragment plate fixation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Describing the spine surgery learning curve during the first two years of independent practice.

ABSTRACT: Retrospective cohort studyTo characterize the learning curve of a spine surgeon during the first 2 years of independent practice by comparing to an experienced colleague. To stratify learning curves based on procedure to evaluate the effect of experience on surgical complexity.The learning curve for spine surgery is difficult to quantify, but is useful information for hospital administrators/surgical programs/new graduates, so appropriate expectations and accommodations are considered.Data from a retrospective cohort (2014-2016) were analyzed at a quaternary academic institution servicing a geographically-isolated, mostly rural area. Procedures included anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, posterior cervical decompression and stabilization, single and 2-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion, lumbar discectomy, and laminectomy. Data related to patient demographics, after-hours surgery, and revision surgery were collected. Operative time was the primary outcome measure, with secondary measures including cerebrospinal fluid leak and early re-operation. Time periods were stratified into 6 month quarters (quarter [Q] 1-Q4), with STATA software used for statistical analysis.There were 626 patients meeting inclusion criteria. The senior surgeon had similar operative times throughout the study. The new surgeon demonstrated a decrease in operative time from Q1 to Q4 (158 minutes-119 minutes, P < .05); however, the mean operative time was shorter for the senior surgeon at 2 years (91 minutes, P < .05). The senior surgeon performed more revision surgeries (odds ratio [OR] 2.5 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.7-3.6]; P < .001). Posterior interbody fusion times remained longer for the new surgeon, while laminectomy surgery was similar to the senior surgeon by 2 years. There were no differences in rates of cerebrospinal fluid leak (OR 1.2 [95% CI 0.6-2.5]; P > .05), nor reoperation (OR 1.16 [95% CI 0.7-1.9]; P > .05) between surgeons.A significant learning curve exists starting spine practice and likely extends beyond the first 2 years for elective operations.

Graft Utilization in the Bridging Reconstruction of Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff tears are one of the most common conditions affecting the shoulder. Because of the difficulty in managing massive rotator cuff tears and the inability of standard techniques to prevent arthropathy, surgeons have developed several novel techniques to improve outcomes and ideally alter the natural history. PURPOSE: To systematically review the existing literature and analyze reported outcomes to evaluate the effectiveness of using a bridging graft reconstruction technique to treat large to massive irreparable rotator cuff tears. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL was employed with the key terms "tear," "allograft," and "rotator cuff." Eligibility was determined by a 3-phase screening process according to the outlined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data in relation to the primary and secondary outcomes were summarized. The results were synthesized according to the origin of the graft and the level of evidence. RESULTS: Fifteen studies in total were included in this review: 2 comparative studies and 13 observational case series. Both the biceps tendon and the fascia lata autograft groups had significantly superior structural integrity rates on magnetic resonance imaging at 12-month minimum follow-up when compared with their partial primary repair counterparts (58% vs 26%, P = .036; 79% vs 58%, P < .05), respectively. Multiple noncomparative case series investigating allografts, xenografts, and synthetic materials for bridging reconstruction of large to massive rotator cuff tears demonstrated high structural healing rates (74%-90%, 73%-100%, and 60%-90%, respectively). Additionally, both comparative studies and case series demonstrated a general improvement of patients' functional outcome scores. CONCLUSION: Using a graft for an anatomic bridging rotator cuff repair results in improved function on objective testing and may be functionally better than nonanatomic or partial repair of large to massive rotator cuff tears. Allograft or xenograft techniques appear to be favorable options, given demonstrated functional improvement, imaging-supported graft survival, and lack of harvest complication risk. More high-quality randomized controlled studies are needed to further assess this technique.

Graft Utilization in the Augmentation of Large-to-Massive Rotator Cuff Repairs: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Current treatment options for symptomatic large-to-massive rotator cuff tears can reduce pain, but failure rates remain high. Surgeons have incorporated synthetic and biologic grafts to augment these repairs, with promising results. Multiple reviews exist that summarize these products; however, no systematic review has investigated the grafts' ability to maintain structural integrity after augmentation of large-to-massive rotator cuff repairs. PURPOSE: To systematically review and evaluate the effectiveness of grafts in the augmentation of large-to-massive rotator cuff repairs. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: A comprehensive search of 4 reputable databases was completed. Inclusion criteria were (1) large-to-massive rotator cuff tear, (2) graft augmentation of primary repairs ± primary repair control group, and (3) minimum clinical and radiologic follow-up of 12 months. Two reviewers screened the titles, abstracts, and full articles and extracted the data from eligible studies. Results were summarized into evidence tables stratified by graft origin and level of evidence. RESULTS: Ten studies fit the inclusion criteria. Allograft augmentation was functionally and structurally superior to primary repair controls, with intact repairs in 85% versus 40% of patients (P < .01). This was supported by observational study data. Xenograft augmentation failed to demonstrate superiority to primary repair controls, with worse structural healing rates (27% vs 60%; P =.11). Both comparative studies supported this finding. There have also been many reports of inflammatory reactions with xenograft use. Polypropylene patches are associated with improved structural (83% vs 59% and 49%; P < .01) and functional outcomes when compared with controls and xenograft augmentation; however, randomized data are lacking. CONCLUSION: Augmentation of large-to-massive rotator cuff repairs with human dermal allografts is associated with superior functional and structural outcome when compared with conventional primary repair. Xenograft augmentation failed to demonstrate a statistically significant difference and may be associated with worse rerupture rates and occasional severe inflammatory reactions. Polypropylene patches have initial promising results. Research in this field is limited; future researchers should continue to develop prospective, randomized controlled trials to establish clear recommendations.