Arthroscopic Bankart Repair with Remplissage Yields Similar Outcomes to Open Latarjet for Primary and Revision Stabilization in The Setting of Subcritical Glenoid Bone Loss.

BACKGROUND: Management of patients with recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability in the setting of subcritical glenoid bone loss (GBL), defined in this study as 20% GBL or less, remains controversial. This study aimed to compare arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage (ABR+R) to open Latarjet for subcritical GBL in primary or revision procedures. We hypothesized that ABR+R would yield higher rates of recurrent instability and reoperation compared to Latarjet in both primary and revision settings. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on patients undergoing either arthroscopic ABR+R or an open Latarjet procedure. Patients with connective tissue disorders, critical GBL (>20%), < 2 year follow-up, or insufficient data were excluded. Recurrent instability and revision were the primary outcomes of interest. Additional outcomes of interest included subjective shoulder value (SSV), strength and range of motion (ROM) RESULTS: 108 patients (70 ABR+R, 38 Latarjet) were included with an average follow-up of 4.3 ±2.1 years. In the primary and revision settings, similar rates of recurrent instability (Primary: p=0.60; Revision: p=0.28) and reoperation (Primary: p=0.06; Revision: p=1.00) were observed between Latarjet and ABR+R. Primary ABR+R exhibited better SSV, active ROM, and internal rotation strength compared to primary open Latarjet. However, no differences were observed in the revision setting. CONCLUSION: Similar rates of recurrent instability and reoperation in addition to comparable outcomes with no differences in ROM were found for ABR+R and Latarjet in patients with subcritical GBL in both the primary and revision settings. ABR+R can be a safe and effective procedure in appropriately selected patients with less than 20% GBL for both primary and revision stabilization.

The Role of Osteotomy in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Coronal and sagittal plane knee malalignments have been shown to increase the forces on anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) grafts after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Studies have shown the benefit of high tibial osteotomy to address coronal and sagittal imbalance in revision ACLR. The purpose of this article is to further describe the use of osteotomy by reviewing preoperative planning, indications, techniques, and outcomes of high tibial opening and closing wedge as well as anterior tibial closing wedge osteotomies in the setting of ACLR.

Surgical Techniques in Primary ACL Reconstruction: Getting It Right the First Time.

The ideal anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is an individualized anatomic approach aimed at restoring the native structure and function of the knee. Surgeons are tasked with difficult decisions during operative planning, including the optimal graft choice for the patient and appropriate anatomic tunnel placement. Special considerations should additionally be given for skeletally immature patients and those at high-risk for failure, including younger, active patients participating in pivoting sports. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the individualized approach to ACLR, including the necessary preoperative and operative considerations to optimize patient outcomes.

Precision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.

Precision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) refers to the individualized approach to prerehabilitation, surgery (including anatomy, bony morphology, and repair/reconstruction of concomitant injuries), postrehabilitation, and functional recovery. This individualized approach is poised to revolutionize orthopedic sports medicine, aiming to improve patient outcomes. The purpose of this article is to provide a summary of precision ACLR, from the time of diagnosis to the time of return to play, with additional insight into the future of ACLR.

Return to Work After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.

Background: The timing of return to work (RTW) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) is a less studied milestone compared with return to sports. Purpose: To systematically review the rate and postoperative timing of RTW after ACLR. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: This study was conducted in accordance with the 2020 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Ovid databases for clinical studies reporting RTW after ACLR, and 806 studies were identified in August 2022. A quality assessment was performed using the Methodological Index of Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) grading system. The following data were extracted from studies: study characteristics, cohort demographics, ACLR technique, concomitant meniscal and/or cartilage procedures, preoperative patient-reported outcomes, rates of RTW, and days required for RTW after ACLR. Results: A total of 13 studies met inclusion criteria, totaling 1791 patients (86.4% male). Wide variability was observed in the methodological quality of the assessed studies (MINORS score range, 8-17). Hamstring tendon (HT) autograft was used in 76.8% (n = 1377; mean age, 30.5 years old), allograft in 17.1% (n = 308; mean age, 33.1 years old), the ligament advanced reinforcement system in 2.5% (n = 46; mean age, 33.2 years old), bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft in 2% (n = 36; mean age, 28.5 years old), and quadriceps tendon autograft in 1.3% (n = 24; mean age, 24.1 years old). Among the included patients, 99.1% (n = 1781) reported successful RTW after surgery. The mean time to RTW was 84.2 days (range, 31.4-107.1 days) for HT and 69.5 days (range, 49-56.6 days) for allograft. Conclusion: While data regarding work intensity before and after ACL injury were absent, our study results suggested that patients most often RTW within 90 days of surgery. Patients with allograft ACLR may RTW earlier than patients undergoing ACLR with HT autograft.

Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction and Associated Procedures.

Failure of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a common yet devastating complication due to inferior clinical outcomes associated with revision ACLR. Identifying the cause and associated risk factors for failure is the most important consideration during preoperative planning. Special attention to tunnel quality, concomitant injuries, and modifiable risk factors will help determine the optimal approach and staging for revision ACLR. Additional procedures including lateral extra-articular tenodesis and osteotomy may be considered for at-risk populations. The purpose of this review is to explore causes of ACLR failure, clinical indications and appropriate patient evaluation, and technical considerations when performing revision ACLR.

'Real world' clinical implementation of blood flow restriction therapy does not increase quadriceps strength after quadriceps tendon autograft ACL reconstruction.

PURPOSE: To retrospectively compare strength outcomes of individuals undergoing postoperative rehabilitation following quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with and without blood flow restriction therapy. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing ACLR with QT autograft with a minimum of two quantitative postoperative isometric strength assessments via an electromechanical dynamometer (Biodex) was included. Demographics, surgical variables and strength measurement outcomes were compared between patients undergoing blood flow restriction therapy as part of postoperative rehabilitation versus those who did not. RESULTS: Eighty-one (81) patients met the inclusion criteria. No differences were found in demographic and surgical characteristics between those who received blood flow restriction compared with those who did not. While both groups had improvements in quadriceps peak torque and limb symmetry index (LSI; defined as peak torque of the operative limb divided by the peak torque of the nonoperative limb) over the study period, the blood flow restriction group had significantly lower mean peak torque of the operative limb at first Biodex strength measurement (95.6 vs. 111.2 Nm; p = 0.03). Additionally, the blood flow restriction group had a significantly lower mean LSI than those with no blood flow restriction at the second Biodex measurement timepoint (81% vs. 90%; p = 0.02). No other significant differences were found between the strength outcomes measured. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study show that the 'real world' clinical implementation of blood flow restriction therapy to the postoperative rehabilitation protocol following QT autograft ACLR did not result in an increase in absolute or longitudinal changes in quadriceps strength measurements. A better understanding and standardisation of the use of blood flow restriction therapy in the rehabilitation setting is necessary to delineate the true effects of this modality on strength recovery after QT autograft ACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Preoperative factors associated with 180°, 270°, and 360° labral tears.

BACKGROUND: Large, circumferential glenoid labral tears are an uncommon injury affecting young, athletic patients. There are limited data describing the clinical presentation of patients with larger tears, especially 270° and 360° labral tears. Additionally, examination and imaging findings have poor reliability in diagnosing these tears. The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical presentation among patients presenting with small (less than 180°), medium (180°-270°), and large (270°-360°) labral tears. METHODS: This is a retrospective comparative study of consecutive patients surgically managed by a single shoulder surgeon for all glenoid labral tears from 2018-2022. The primary outcome was demographic and preoperative clinical risk factors. Demographic data including age, sex, hand dominance, body mass index, as well as clinical presentation (subluxation vs. dislocation, instability history, and participation in contact sports) were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 188 patients met the inclusion criteria: 101 of 188 (53.70%) patients with small tears, 43 of 188 (22.90%) patients with medium tears, and 44 of 188 (23.40%) patients with large tears. Individuals with large and medium-sized labral tears were more likely to have participated in contact sports compared to those with smaller labral tears (P = .003). Medium and smaller tears were more likely to present as dominant-side injury (P = .02). Furthermore, medium and large tears were more likely to present with anterior instability symptoms compared with smaller tears, which more frequently presented with posterior instability and pain (P = .003). CONCLUSION: Males participating in contact sports were the most common demographic population presenting with large, 270°-360° labral tears. Instability was the primary complaint rather than pain, and compared with small tears, medium and large tears were more likely to present with primary anterior instability. Although arthroscopic repair of 270°-360° labral tears can yield excellent clinical outcomes similar to smaller tears, identifying factors associated with larger glenoid labral tears may help in surgical planning and patient counseling.

Bipolar bone loss and distance to dislocation.

Studies have shown that glenoid- and humeral-sided bone loss may be present in up to 73-93% of individuals with recurrent anterior shoulder instability. As such, bone loss must be addressed appropriately, as the amount of bone loss drives surgical decision making and influences outcomes. Methods to describe and measure bone loss have changed over time. Originally, glenoid and humeral bone loss were viewed separately. However, the concepts of bipolar bone loss, the glenoid track (GT), and "on/off-track" lesions arose, highlighting the interplay between the two entities in contributing to recurrent instability. Classically, "off-track" lesions have been described as those Hill-Sachs interval (HSI) greater than the GT, and have been shown to result in higher rates of re-instability when addressed nonoperatively or with Bankart repair alone. More recently, further attention has been given to "on-track" lesions (HSI < GT). The new concept of "distance to dislocation" (DTD) has gained popularity. DTD is calculated as the difference between the GT and HSI, and literature evaluating DTD suggests that not all "on-track" lesions should be treated in the same manner. The purpose of this concept review article is twofold: (I) describe glenoid, humeral, and bipolar bone loss in the setting of anterior shoulder instability; and (II) elaborate on the new concept of "DTD" and its use in guidance of management.

Factors Associated With Knee Extension Strength Symmetry After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction With Quadriceps Tendon Autograft.

Background: Diminished postoperative knee extension strength may occur after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft. Factors influencing the restoration of knee extensor strength after ACLR with QT autograft remain undefined. Purpose: To identify factors that influence knee extensor strength after ACLR with QT autograft. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The authors performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent primary ACLR with QT autograft at a single institution between 2010 and 2021. Patients were included if they completed electromechanical dynamometer testing at least 6 months after surgery. Exclusion criteria consisted of revision ACLR, <6 months of follow-up, concomitant procedure (osteotomy, cartilage restoration), and concomitant ligamentous injury requiring surgery. Knee extension limb symmetry index (LSI) was obtained by comparing the peak torque of the operated and nonoperated extremities. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with knee extension LSI in the patient, injury, rehabilitation, and preoperative patient-reported outcomes score domains. Results: A total of 107 patients (58 male; mean age, 22.8 years) were included. Mean knee extension LSI of the overall cohort was 0.82 ± 0.18 at 7.5 ± 2.0 months; 35 patients (33%) had a value of ≥0.90. Multivariable analysis demonstrated significant negative associations between knee extension LSI and female sex (-0.12; P < .001), increased age at the time of surgery (-0.01; P = .018), and larger QT graft width (-0.049; P = .053). Conclusion: Factors influencing knee extensor LSI after ACLR with QT autograft in this study population spanned patient and surgical factors, including female sex, older age at the time of surgery, and wider graft harvest. Surgeons should consider the association between these factors and lower postoperative knee extensor LSI to optimize patient outcomes.

Outcomes of bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft and quadriceps tendon autograft for ACL reconstruction in an all-female soccer player cohort with mean 4.8-year follow up.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose is to compare functional outcomes, return to soccer rates, and revision rates in an all-female soccer player cohort undergoing quadriceps tendon (QT) autograft ACLR versus bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) autograft ACLR. METHODS: Female soccer players who sustained an ACL rupture and underwent primary anatomic, single-bundle ACLR with BPTB autograft or QT autograft were included. Demographic and surgical characteristics were collected. Outcomes of interest included Tegner score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Marx score, return to soccer rates, and failure rates. RESULTS: Data on 23 patients undergoing BPTB autograft ACLR and 14 undergoing QT autograft ACLR was available. Average age was 18.7 years, and average follow up was 4.8 years. Overall, 76 â€‹% (28/37) returned to soccer and 5.4 â€‹% (2/37) underwent revision ACLR. No major significant differences were found in demographic or surgical characteristics. No differences were found in postoperative IKDC scores, preoperative, postoperative, or change from pre-to postoperative Marx activity scores, or pre-and postoperative Tegner scores between the groups. QT autograft ACLR patients had significantly less change in Tegner scores pre-to postoperatively compared to the BTPB autograft ACLR group (0.6 â€‹± â€‹1.2 versus 2.1 â€‹± â€‹1.8; p â€‹= â€‹0.02). Both groups had similar rates of return to soccer [78 â€‹% (18/23) BPTB autograft ACLR versus 71 â€‹% (10/14) QT autograft ACLR; p â€‹= â€‹0.64] and rates of revision (8.7 % (2/23) BPTB autograft ACLR; 0 % (0/14) QT autograft ACLR. CONCLUSION: Results of this study suggest that BPTB autograft ACLR and QT autograft ACLR produce comparable, successful functional and return to soccer outcomes in this all-female soccer player cohort study. Larger, prospective studies are needed to improve the strength of conclusions and provide more information on the optimal graft choice for female soccer players. Surgeons can use the results of this study to counsel female soccer players on expected outcomes after ACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Strength symmetry after autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative isometric quadriceps strength indices (QI%) and hamstring strength limb symmetry indices (HI%) between partial thickness quadriceps tendon (pQT), full thickness quadriceps tendon (fQT), and bone-patellar-tendon bone (BPTB) autograft anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). METHODS: Patients with primary ACLR with pQT, fQT, or BPTB autograft with the documentation of quantitative postoperative strength assessments between 2016 and 2021 were included. Isometric Biodex data, including QI% and HI% (calculated as the percentage of involved to uninvolved limb strength) were collected between 5 and 8 months and between 9 and 15 months postoperatively. RESULTS: In total, 124 and 51 patients had 5-8- and 9-15-month follow-up strength data, respectively. No significant difference was detected between groups for sex. However, patients undergoing fQT were found to be older than those undergoing BPTB (24.6±7 vs 20.2±5; â€‹p = 0.01). There were no significant differences in the number of concomitant meniscus repairs between the groups (pQT vs. fQT vs. BPTB). No significant differences were detected in median (min-max) QI% between pQT, fQT, and BPTB 5-8 months [87 â€‹% (44%-130 â€‹%), 84 â€‹% (44%-110 â€‹%), 82 â€‹% (37%-110 â€‹%) or 9-15 months [89 â€‹% (50%-110 â€‹%), 89 â€‹% (67%-110 â€‹%), and 90 â€‹% (74%-140 â€‹%)] postoperatively. Similarly, no differences were detected in median HI% between the groups 5-8 months or 9-15 months postoperatively. CONCLUSION: The study was unable to detect differences in the recovery of quadriceps strength between patients undergoing ACLR with pQT, fQT, and BPTB autografts at 5-8 months and 9-15-months postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Criteria-based return to sport testing after open Latarjet reveals residual deficits and can be utilized for sports clearance with excellent outcomes at mean 3.6 year follow-up: A small case series of competitive athletes.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the use of a criteria-based return to sport (CBRTS) test to evaluate readiness for return to play (RTP) in competitive athletes that underwent open Latarjet. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. METHODS: Ten competitive athletes (mean age 19.9 years) treated with open Latarjet for recurrent glenohumeral instability underwent CBRTS testing at a mean of 5.3 months postoperatively. Testing consisted of four components: 1. isometric strength, 2. isokinetic strength, 3. endurance, and 4. function. Patients failing 0 or 1 component of the test were cleared to RTP. Patients failing multiple components underwent additional deficit-based rehabilitation. RESULTS: Of the 10 patients that tested, 4 passed their overall CBRTS test and were cleared to RTP. The remaining 6 patients failed the overall CBRTS test. Seven patients (70%) failed at least one section of the strength testing, two patients (20%) failed endurance testing, and two patients (20%) failed functional testing. At final follow-up (mean 3.6 years), 1 patient had recurrent instability (10%) and 9 patients returned to play (90%). CONCLUSIONS: CBRTS testing may be clinically useful for return to play clearance decisions after open Latarjet procedure, as it can reveal deficits that may not be identified with time-based clearance alone.

Reversing chronic pseudoparesis secondary to massive, irreparable rotator cuff tear: superior capsular reconstruction vs. reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Recent studies have defined pseudoparesis as limited active forward elevation between 45° and 90° and maintained passive range of motion (ROM) in the setting of a massive rotator cuff tear (RCT). Although pseudoparesis can be reliably reversed with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) or superior capsular reconstruction (SCR), the optimal treatment for this indication remains unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of RSA to SCR in patients with pseudoparesis secondary to massive, irreparable RCT (miRCT). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients aged 40-70 years with pseudoparesis secondary to miRCT who were treated with either RSA or SCR by a single fellowship-trained shoulder surgeon from 2016 to 2021 with a minimum 12-month follow-up. Multivariate linear regression modeling was used to compare active ROM, visual analog pain scale (VAS), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score between RSA and SCR while controlling for confounding variables. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were included in the RSA cohort and 23 patients were included in the SCR cohort with similar mean follow-up times (26.2 ± 21.1 vs. 21.9 ± 14.7 months, respectively). The patients in the RSA group were significantly older than those in the SCR group (65.2 ± 4.4 vs. 54.2 ± 7.8 years, P < .001) and had more severe arthritis (1.8 ± 0.9 vs. 1.2 ± 0.5 Samilson-Prieto, P = .019). The pseudoparesis reversal rate among the RSA and SCR cohorts was 96.3% and 91.3%, respectively. On univariate analysis, the RSA cohort demonstrated significantly greater mean improvement in active FF (89° ± 26° vs. 73° ± 30° change, P = .048), greater postoperative SSV (91 ± 8% vs. 69 ± 25%, P < .001), lower postoperative VAS pain scores (0.6 ± 1.2 vs. 2.2 ± 2.9, P = .020), and less postoperative internal rotation (IR; 4.6° ± 1.6° vs. 6.9° ± 1.8°, P = .004) compared with SCR. On multivariate analysis controlling for age and osteoarthritis, RSA remained a significant predictor of greater SSV (ß = 21.5, P = .021) and lower VAS scores (ß = -1.4, P = .037), whereas SCR was predictive of greater IR ROM (ß = 3.0, P = .043). CONCLUSION: Although both RSA and SCR effectively reverse pseudoparesis, patients with RSA have higher SSV and lower pain scores but less IR after controlling for age and osteoarthritis. The results of this study may inform surgical decision making for patients who are suitable candidates for either procedure.

Overhead athletes have comparable intraoperative injury patterns and clinical outcomes to non-overhead athletes following surgical stabilization for first-time anterior shoulder instability at average 6-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Anterior shoulder instability is a common problem affecting young, athletic populations that results in potential career-altering functional limitations. However, little is known regarding the differences in clinical outcomes after operative management of overhead vs. non-overhead athletes presenting with first-time anterior shoulder instability. We hypothesized that overhead athletes would have milder clinical presentations, similar surgical characteristics, and diminished postoperative outcomes when compared with non-overhead athletes after surgical stabilization following first-time anterior shoulder instability episodes. METHODS: Patients with first-time anterior shoulder instability events (subluxations and dislocations) undergoing operative management between 2013 and 2020 were included. The exclusion criteria included multiple dislocations and multidirectional shoulder instability. Baseline demographic characteristics, imaging data, examination findings, and intraoperative findings were retrospectively collected. Patients were contacted to collect postoperative patient-reported outcomes including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score, Brophy activity index score, and Subjective Shoulder Value, in addition to return-to-work and -sport, recurrent dislocation, and revision rates. RESULTS: A total of 256 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 178 (70%) were non-overhead athletes. The mean age of the entire population was 23.1 years. There was no significant difference in concomitant shoulder pathology, preoperative range of motion, or preoperative strength between cohorts. A greater proportion of overhead athletes presented with instability events not requiring manual reduction (defined as subluxations; 64.1% vs. 50.6%; P < .001) and underwent arthroscopic surgery (97% vs. 76%, P < .001) compared with non-overhead athletes. A smaller proportion of overhead athletes underwent open soft-tissue stabilization compared with non-overhead athletes (1% vs. 19%, P < .001). Outcome data were available for 60 patients with an average follow-up period of 6.7 years. No significant differences were found between groups with respect to recurrent postoperative instability event rate (13.0% for overhead athletes vs. 16.8% for non-overhead athletes), revision rate (13.0% for overhead athletes vs. 11.1% for non-overhead athletes), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score, Brophy score, Subjective Shoulder Value, or rates of return to work or sport. CONCLUSION: Overhead athletes who underwent surgery after an initial instability event were more likely to present with subluxations compared with non-overhead athletes. With limited follow-up subject to biases, this study found no differences in recurrence or revision rates, postoperative patient-reported outcomes, or return-to-work or -sport rates between overhead and non-overhead athletes undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery following first-time instability events. Although larger prospective studies are necessary to draw firmer conclusions, the findings of this study suggest that overhead athletes can be considered in the same treatment pathway for first-time dislocation as non-overhead athletes.

Comparison of Improvement in Patient-Reported Knee Function After Revision and Multiple-Revision ACL Reconstruction Compared With Primary ACL Reconstruction.

Background: Graft failure after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is a debilitating complication often requiring revision surgery. It is widely agreed upon that functional knee outcomes after revision ACLR (r-ACLR) are inferior compared with those after primary reconstruction. However, data are scarce on outcomes after multiple-revision ACLR (mr-ACLR). Purpose: To compare patient-reported knee function in terms of Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) preoperatively and 1-year postoperatively after primary ACLR, r-ACLR, and mr-ACLR and evaluate the pre- to postoperative improvement in KOOS scores for each procedure. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry who underwent their index ACLR between 2005 and 2020 with a minimum age of 15 years at the time of surgery were included in this study. All patients had pre- and postoperative KOOS data. The 1-year postoperative KOOS and the pre- to postoperative changes in KOOS were assessed between patients who underwent primary ACLR and those who underwent subsequent r-ACLR and mr-ACLR. Results: Of 20,542 included patients, 19,769 (96.2%) underwent primary ACLR, 760 (3.7%) underwent r-ACLR, and 13 (0.06%) underwent mr-ACLR. Patients who underwent r-ACLR had significantly smaller pre- to postoperative changes on all KOOS subscales compared with patients undergoing primary ACLR (P < .0001 for all). Furthermore, patients in the mr-ACLR group had significantly smaller changes in the KOOS-Pain subscale compared with patients in the r-ACLR group (-9 ± 23.3 vs 2.5 ± 18; P = .024). Conclusion: The study results indicated that while improvement is seen after primary ACLR, r-ACLR, and mr-ACLR, the greatest improvement in functional outcomes is observed after primary ACLR. Patients who underwent at least 1 r-ACLR, specifically mr-ACLR, had lower postoperative outcome scores, indicating that primary ACLR may provide the best chance for recovery after ACL injury.

Myotendinous junction tears of the pectoralis major are occurring more frequently and discrepancies exist between intraoperative and radiographic assessments.

Background: Pectoralis major (PM) tears have been shown to occur most frequently at the tendinous humeral insertion. However, no substantial updates on tear location have been published in 20 years or are based on relatively small sample sizes. The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate PM tear location based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). A secondary purpose was to evaluate agreement between MRI and intraoperative assessments of tear characteristics. We hypothesized that PM tears at the myotendinous junction (MTJ) occur at a higher rate than previously reported and that intraoperative and MRI assessments would demonstrate agreement in at least 80% of cases. Materials and methods: An observational study of consecutive patients evaluated for a PM tear at a single institution between 2010 and 2022 was conducted. Patient demographics as well as MRI and intraoperative assessments of tear location, extent of tear, and muscle head involvement were collected from the electronic medical record. Agreement was calculated by comparing radiographic and intraoperative assessments per variable and reported as percentages. Data and statistical analysis were performed with SPSS software with a significance level set to P < .05. Results: A total of 102 patients were included for analysis. Mean age was 35.8 ± 10.5 years and mean body mass index was 29.4 ± 4.8 kg/m2. 60.4% of the study population had tears of the MTJ, 34.9% of the tendinous humeral insertion, and 4.7% within the muscle belly, as determined intraoperatively. Complete tears had significantly higher agreement between MRI and intraoperative assessments relative to partial tears (83.9% and 62.5%, respectively; P ≤ .01). Discussion: The majority of PM tears occurred at the MTJ. Preoperative MRI and intraoperative assessments agreed in 80% of cases, a value that was significantly higher for complete over partial tears. These findings demonstrate that tears of the MTJ are increasingly more common and support the use of MRI in preoperative planning for complete PM tears.

Differences in postoperative knee function based on concomitant treatment of lateral meniscal injury in the setting of primary ACL reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Concomitant lateral meniscal (LM) injuries are common in acute anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures. However, the effect of addressing these injuries with various treatment methods during primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is unknown. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare postoperative Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 2-, 5-, and 10-years after isolated primary ACLR to primary ACLR with various treatment methods to address concomitant LM injury. METHODS: This study was based on data from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry. Patients ≥ 15 years with data on postoperative KOOS who underwent primary ACLR between the years 2005 and 2018 were included in this study. The study population was divided into five groups: 1) Isolated ACLR, 2) ACLR + LM repair, 3) ACLR + LM resection, 4) ACLR + LM injury left in situ, and 5) ACLR + LM repair + LM resection. Patients with concomitant medial meniscal or other surgically treated ligament injuries were excluded. RESULTS: Of 31,819 included patients, 24% had LM injury. After post hoc comparisons, significantly lower scores were found for the KOOS Symptoms subscale in ACLR + LM repair group compared to isolated ACLR (76.0 vs 78.3, p = 0.0097) and ACLR + LM injury left in situ groups (76.0 vs 78.3, p = 0.041) at 2-year follow-up. However, at 10-year follow-up, no differences were found between ACLR + LM repair and isolated ACLR, but ACLR + LM resection resulted in significantly lower KOOS Symptoms scores compared to isolated ACLR (80.4 vs 82.3, p = 0.041). CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that LM injury during ACLR is associated with lower KOOS scores, particularly in the Symptoms subscale, at short- and long-term follow-up. However, this finding falls below minimal clinical important difference and therefore may not be clinically relevant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Effect of Concomitant Lateral Meniscal Management on ACL Reconstruction Revision Rate and Secondary Meniscal and Cartilaginous Injuries.

BACKGROUND: Simultaneous meniscal tears are often present with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries, and in the acute setting, the lateral meniscus (LM) is more commonly injured than the medial meniscus. PURPOSE: To investigate how a concomitant LM injury, repaired, resected, or left in situ during primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR), affects the ACL revision rate and cartilaginous and meniscal status at the time of revision within 2 years after the primary ACLR. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Data for 31,705 patients with primary ACLR, extracted from the Swedish National Knee Ligament Registry, were used. The odds of revision ACLR, and cartilaginous as well as meniscal injuries at the time of revision ACLR, were assessed between the unexposed comparison group (isolated ACLR) and the exposed groups of interest (ACLR + LM repair, ACLR + LM resection, ACLR + LM repair + LM resection, or ACLR + LM injury left in situ). RESULTS: In total, 719 (2.5%) of the included 29,270 patients with 2 years follow-up data underwent revision ACLR within 2 years after the primary ACLR. No significant difference in revision rate was found between the groups. Patients with concomitant LM repair (OR, 3.56; 95% CI, 1.57-8.10; P = .0024) or LM resection (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.18-2.62; P = .0055) had higher odds of concomitant meniscal injuries (medial or lateral) at the time of revision ACLR than patients undergoing isolated primary ACLR. Additionally, higher odds of concomitant cartilage injuries at the time of revision ACLR were found in patients with LM resection at index ACLR compared with patients undergoing isolated primary ACLR (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.14-2.63; P = .010). CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrated higher odds of meniscal and cartilaginous injuries at the time of revision ACLR within 2 years after primary ACLR + LM resection and higher odds of meniscal injury at the time of revision ACLR within 2 years after primary ACLR + LM repair compared with isolated ACLR. Surgeons should be aware of the possibility of concomitant cartilaginous and meniscal injuries at the time of revision ACLR after index ACLR with concomitant LM injury, regardless of the index treatment type received.

Rates of Septic Arthritis After ACL Reconstruction: A Single-Center Analysis Highlighting Quadriceps Tendon Grafts.

BACKGROUND: Although the infection rates for bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft (BTB), hamstring tendon autograft (HT), and allograft have been reported previously, there are limited data available for a large cohort of individuals undergoing anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) using quadriceps tendon autograft (QT). PURPOSE: The aims of this study are (1) to compare rates of septic arthritis after primary and revision ACLR with QT, BTB, HT, and allograft and (2) to evaluate the association between an infection after ACLR and potential risk factors in a large single-system analysis. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All ACLR cases performed by 10 high-volume sports medicine fellowship-trained ACL surgeons between January 2000 and January 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Minimum follow-up was 90 days after ACLR, and all multiligament reconstructions were excluded. Demographic information, surgical variables, infection characteristics, and rate of ACL graft retention were collected for all included patients. Independent samples t test, chi-square test, or Fisher exact tests with adjusted Benjamini-Hochberg post hoc procedure were used for group comparisons. RESULTS: In total, 6652 patients were included in this study. The most commonly used graft was allograft (n = 2491; 37.4%), followed by HT (n = 1743; 26.2%), BTB (n = 1478; 22.2%), and QT (n = 940; 14.1%). The overall postoperative rate of septic arthritis was 0.34% (n = 23). Septic arthritis rates based on graft type were 0.74% (n = 13) for HT, 0.24% (n = 6) for allograft, 0.20% (n = 3) for BTB, and 0.10% (n = 1) for QT. While a statistically significant difference with regard to graft type (P = .01) was observed, no significant relationships were found between postoperative septic arthritis and age, sex, revision ACLR, ACLR surgical technique, and accompanying intra-articular procedures for all septic arthritis patients (P > .05). The average time from the onset of the symptoms of infection to surgical irrigation and debridement (I&D) was 2 days (minimum, 0; maximum, 6). ACL grafts were retained during I&D procedures in all patients with postoperative septic arthritis. CONCLUSION: The postoperative rate of septic arthritis was 0.1% after use of the QT autograft. While graft choice may affect rates of septic arthritis after ACLR, patient characteristics, ACLR technique, revision ACLR, and accompanying intra-articular procedures during ACLR were not associated with postoperative septic arthritis with the numbers available for analysis.