Root Repair Has Superior Radiological and Clinical Outcomes Than Partial Meniscectomy and Nonoperative Treatment in the Management of Meniscus Root Tears: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To compile and analyze structural and clinical outcomes after meniscus root tear treatment as currently described in the literature. METHODS: A review was conducted to identify studies published since 2011 on efficacy of repair, meniscectomy, and nonoperative management in the treatment of meniscus root tears. Patient cohorts were grouped into treatment categories, with medial and lateral root tears analyzed separately; data were collected on patient demographics, structural outcomes including joint space width, degree of medial meniscal extrusion, progression to total knee arthroplasty, and patient-reported outcome measures. Risk of bias was assessed using the MINORS (methodological index for non-randomized studies) criteria. Heterogeneity was measured using the I-statistic, and outcomes were summarized using forest plots without pooled means. RESULTS: The 56 included studies comprised a total of 3,191 patients. Mean age among the included studies ranged from 24.6 to 65.6 years, whereas mean follow-up ranged from 12 to 125.9 months. Heterogeneity analysis identified significant differences between studies. Change in joint space width ranged from -2.4 to -0.6 mm (i.e., decreased space) after meniscectomy (n = 186) and -0.9 to -0.1 mm after root repair (n = 209); change in medial meniscal extrusion ranged from -0.6 to 6.5 mm after root repair (n = 521) and 0.2 to 4.2 mm after meniscectomy (n = 66); and event rate for total knee arthroplasty ranged from 0.00 to 0.22 after root repair (n = 205), 0.35 to 0.60 after meniscectomy (n = 53), and 0.27 to 0.35 after nonoperative treatment (n = 93). Root repair produced the greatest numerical increase in International Knee Documentation Committee and Lysholm scores of the 3 treatment arms. In addition, root repair improvements in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Pain (range: 22-32), Sports and Recreational Activities (range: 23-36), Quality of Life (range: 22-42), and Symptoms subscales (range: 10-19), in studies with low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: The literature reporting on the treatment of meniscus root tears is heterogenous and largely limited to Level III and IV studies. Current evidence suggests root repair may be the most effective treatment strategy in lessening joint space narrowing of the knee and producing improvements in patient-reported outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

Surgical Repair of Hypermobile Lateral Meniscus Secondary to Popliteomeniscal Fascicle Tears Improves Pain and Mechanical Symptoms.

Purpose: To describe the clinical and radiographic features associated with isolated hypermobile lateral meniscus (HLM), and report patient outcomes following surgically repaired isolated HLM. Methods: All patients diagnosed with HLM from 2000 to 2020 at a single academic institution were identified and reviewed. Patients were excluded if they had concomitant ligament injury or lacked 2-year follow-up. Preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores were determined from clinical notes. Statistical analysis was performed in JMP, and statistical significance was determined with use of a paired t-test. Results: Eighteen knees in 17 patients met inclusion criteria. Mean patient age was 24.1 (range: 6-61) years. Mean follow-up was 73 months (25-151 months). All 18 knees reported pain at presentation; 94% (17/18) had mechanical symptoms. All 18 knees had preoperative MRIs, but only 1 (5.6%) knee was correctly diagnosed by a musculoskeletal trained radiologist. Most repairs were performed with an all-inside technique (61%, 11/18). VAS score improved significantly from 7.2 ± 2.9 preoperatively to 0.7 ± 1.9 postoperatively, with average improvement of VAS score of 6.5 (P < .001). Only one (5.6%) knee required revision meniscal surgery. Conclusion: Hypermobile lateral meniscus patients commonly see multiple providers, fail to have their HLM diagnosed on MRI, and undergo various treatments prior to a successful diagnosis. Localized lateral joint line pain, mechanical symptoms, and absence of distinct meniscus tear on MRI are the most frequent clinical presentations. Surgery with meniscus repair is a reliable solution to improve pain and mechanical symptoms. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Artificial Intelligence Can Define and Predict the "Optimal Observed Outcome" After Anterior Shoulder Instability Surgery: An Analysis of 200 Patients With 11-Year Mean Follow-Up.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to use unsupervised machine learning clustering to define the "optimal observed outcome" after surgery for anterior shoulder instability (ASI) and to identify predictors for achieving it. Methods: Medical records, images, and operative reports were reviewed for patients <40 years old undergoing surgery for ASI. Four unsupervised machine learning clustering algorithms partitioned subjects into "optimal observed outcome" or "suboptimal outcome" based on combinations of actually observed outcomes. Demographic, clinical, and treatment variables were compared between groups using descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Variables were assessed for prognostic value through multivariate stepwise logistic regression. Results: Two hundred patients with a mean follow-up of 11 years were included. Of these, 146 (64%) obtained the "optimal observed outcome," characterized by decreased: postoperative pain (23% vs 52%; P < 0.001), recurrent instability (12% vs 41%; P < 0.001), revision surgery (10% vs 24%; P = 0.015), osteoarthritis (OA) (5% vs 19%; P = 0.005), and restricted motion (161° vs 168°; P = 0.001). Forty-one percent of patients had a "perfect outcome," defined as ideal performance across all outcomes. Time from initial instability to presentation (odds ratio [OR] = 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-0.98; P = 0.006) and habitual/voluntary instability (OR = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.04-0.77; P = 0.020) were negative predictors of achieving the "optimal observed outcome." A predilection toward subluxations rather than dislocations before surgery (OR = 1.30; 95% CI, 1.02-1.65; P = 0.030) was a positive predictor. Type of surgery performed was not a significant predictor. Conclusion: After surgery for ASI, 64% of patients achieved the "optimal observed outcome" defined as minimal postoperative pain, no recurrent instability or OA, low revision surgery rates, and increased range of motion, of whom only 41% achieved a "perfect outcome." Positive predictors were shorter time to presentation and predilection toward preoperative subluxations over dislocations. Level of Evidence: Retrospective cohort, level IV.

Management of Partial-Thickness Tears of the Distal Bicep Tendon: Evaluation of 111 Patients With 10-Year Follow-up.

Background: There is a paucity of research on the management of partial-thickness tears of the distal bicep tendon, and even less is known about the long-term outcomes of this condition. Purpose: To identify patients with partial-thickness distal bicep tendon tears and determine (1) patient characteristics and treatment strategies, (2) long-term outcomes, and (3) any identifiable risk factors for progression to surgery or complete tear. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologist identified patients diagnosed with a partial-thickness distal bicep tendon tear on magnetic resonance imaging between 1996 and 2016. Medical records were reviewed to confirm the diagnosis and record study details. Multivariate logistic regression models were created using baseline characteristics, injury details, and physical examination findings to predict operative intervention. Results: In total, 111 patients met inclusion criteria (54 treated operatively, 57 treated nonoperatively), with 53% of tears in the nondominant arm and a mean follow-up time after surgery of 9.7 ± 6.5 years. Only 5% of patients progressed to full-thickness tears during the study period, at a mean of 35 months after the initial diagnosis. Patients who were nonoperatively treated were less likely to miss time from work (12% vs 61%; P < .001) and missed fewer days (30 vs 97 days; P < .016) than those treated surgically. Multivariate regression analyses demonstrated increased risk of progression to surgery with older age at initial consult (unit odds ratio [OR], 1.1), tenderness to palpation (OR, 7.5), and supination weakness (OR, 24.8). Supination weakness at initial consult was a statistically significant predictor for surgical intervention (OR, 24.8; P = .001). Conclusion: Clinical outcomes were favorable for patients regardless of treatment strategy. Approximately 50% of patients were treated surgically; patients with supination weakness were 24 times more likely to undergo surgery than those without. Progression to full-thickness tear was a relatively uncommon reason for surgical intervention, with only 5% of patients progressing to full-thickness tears during the study period and the majority occurring within 3 months of initial diagnosis.

Predicting the Risk of Posttraumatic Osteoarthritis After Primary Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Machine Learning Time-to-Event Analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is a significant long-term risk of posttraumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Elucidating the risk factors and successfully identifying at-risk patients is challenging. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to produce machine learning survival models that can identify (1) patients at risk of symptomatic PTOA and (2) patients who are at risk of undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) after ACLR. It was hypothesized that these models would outperform traditional Kaplan-Meier estimators. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A geographic database was used to identify patients undergoing ACLR between 1990 and 2016 with a minimum 7.5-year follow-up. Models were used to analyze various factors to predict the rate and time to (1) symptomatic osteoarthritis and (2) TKA using random survival forest (RSF) algorithms. Performance was measured using out-of-bag (OOB) c-statistic, calibration, and Brier score. The predictive performances of the RSF models were compared with Kaplan-Meier estimators. Model interpretability was enhanced utilizing global variable importance and partial dependence curves. RESULTS: A total of 974 patients with ACLR and a minimum follow-up of 7.5 years were included; among these, 215 (22.1%) developed symptomatic osteoarthritis, and 25 (2.6%) progressed to TKA. The RSF algorithms achieved acceptable good to excellent predictive performance for symptomatic arthritis (OOB c-statistic, 0.75; Brier score, 0.128) and progression to TKA (OOB c-statistic, 0.89; Brier score, 0.026), respectively. Significant predictors of symptomatic PTOA included increased pain scores, older age, increased body mass index, increased time to ACLR, total number of arthroscopic surgeries before the diagnosis of arthritis, positive pivot-shift test after reconstruction, concomitant chondral injury, secondary meniscal tear, early (<250 days) or delayed (>500 days) return to sports or activity, and use of allograft. Significant predictors for TKA included older age, increased pain scores, total number of arthroscopic surgeries, high-demand activity/occupation, hypermobility, higher body mass index, systemic inflammatory disease, increased time to surgery, early (<250 days) or delayed (>500 days) return to sports or activity, and midsubstance tears. The Brier score over time revealed that RSF models outperformed traditional Kaplan-Meier estimators. CONCLUSION: Machine learning survival models were used to reliably identify patients at risk of developing symptomatic PTOA, and these models consistently outperformed traditional Kaplan-Meier estimators. Strong predictors for the development of PTOA after ACLR included increased pain scores at injury and postoperative visit, older age at injury, total number of arthroscopic procedures, positive postoperative pivot-shift test, and secondary meniscal tear.

Osteochondritis Dissecans of the Capitellum of the Elbow: Improved Outcomes in Surgically Treated Versus Nonoperatively Treated Patients at Long-Term Follow-up.

Purpose: To (1) report the long-term outcomes associated with both operative and nonoperative management of capitellar osteochondritis dissecans (OCD), (2) identify factors associated with failure of nonoperative management, and (3) determine whether delay in surgery affects final outcomes. Methods: All patients who received a diagnosis of capitellar OCD from 1995-2020 within a geographic cohort were included. Medical records, imaging studies, and operative reports were manually reviewed to record demographic data, treatment strategies, and outcomes. The cohort was divided into 3 groups: (1) nonoperative management, (2) early surgery, and (3) delayed surgery. Delayed surgery (surgery ≥6 months after symptom onset) was considered failure of nonoperative management. Results: Fifty elbows with a mean follow-up period of 10.5 years (median, 10.3 years; range, 1-25 years) were studied. Of these, 7 (14%) were definitively treated nonoperatively, 16 (32%) underwent delayed surgery after at least 6 months of failed nonoperative treatment, and 27 (54%) underwent early surgical intervention. When compared with nonoperative management, surgical management resulted in superior Mayo Elbow Performance Index pain scores (40.1 vs 33, P = .04), fewer mechanical symptoms (9% vs 50%, P < .01), and better elbow flexion (141° vs 131°, P = .01) at long-term follow-up. Older patients trended toward increased failure of nonoperative management (P = .06). The presence of an intra-articular loose body predicted failure of nonoperative management (P = .01; odds ratio, 13). Plain radiography and magnetic resonance imaging had poor sensitivities for identifying loose bodies (27% and 40%, respectively). Differences in outcomes after early versus delayed surgical management were not observed. Conclusions: Nonoperative management of capitellar OCD failed 70% of the time. Elbows that did not undergo surgery had slightly more symptoms and decreased functional outcomes compared with those treated surgically. The greatest predictors of failure of nonoperative treatment were older age and presence of a loose body; however, an initial trial of nonoperative treatment did not adversely impact the success of future surgery. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Grooveplasty Compared With Trochleoplasty for the Treatment of Trochlear Dysplasia in the Setting of Patellar Instability.

Purpose: To compare the clinical efficacy in the resolution of patellar instability, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and complication and reoperation rates between patients who underwent grooveplasty (proximal trochleoplasty) and patients who underwent trochleoplasty as part of a combined patellofemoral stabilization procedure. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed to identify a cohort of patients who underwent grooveplasty and a cohort who underwent trochleoplasty at the time of patellar stabilization. Complications, reoperations, and PRO scores (Tegner, Kujala, and International Knee Documentation Committee scores) were collected at final follow-up. The Kruskal-Wallis test and Fisher exact test were performed when appropriate, and P < .05 was considered significant. Results: Overall, 17 grooveplasty patients (18 knees) and 15 trochleoplasty patients (15 knees) were included. Seventy-nine percent of patients were female, and the average follow-up period was 3.9 years. The mean age at first dislocation was 11.8 years overall; most patients (65%) had more than 10 lifetime instability events and 76% of patients underwent prior knee-stabilizing procedures. Trochlear dysplasia (Dejour classification) was similar between cohorts. Patients who underwent grooveplasty had a higher activity level (P = .007) and a higher degree of patellar facet chondromalacia (P = .008) at baseline. At final follow-up, no patients had recurrent symptomatic instability after grooveplasty compared with 5 patients in the trochleoplasty cohort (P = .013). There were no differences in postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee scores (P = .870), Kujala scores (P = .059), or Tegner scores (P = .052). Additionally, there were no differences in complication rates (17% in grooveplasty cohort vs 13% in trochleoplasty cohort, P > .999) or reoperation rates (22% vs 13%, P = .665). Conclusions: Proximal trochlear reshaping and removal of the supratrochlear spur (grooveplasty) in patients with severe trochlear dysplasia may offer an alternative strategy to complete trochleoplasty for the treatment of trochlear dysplasia in complex cases of patellofemoral instability. Grooveplasty patients showed less recurrent instability and similar PROs and reoperation rates compared with trochleoplasty patients. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

A Number of Modifiable and Nonmodifiable Factors Increase the Risk for Elbow Medial Ulnar Collateral Ligament Injury in Baseball Players: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To analyze the current literature regarding risk factors associated with medial ulnar collateral ligament (MUCL) injury in baseball players and to serve as a robust source for identifying modifiable risk factors that once optimized, have the potential to reduce injury risk. METHODS: Comprehensive search of the available literature was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Studies were included if they evaluated risk factors for MUCL injuries in the elbow of baseball players. Risk of bias assessment was performed via Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) scoring system. The Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine was used to determine level of evidence. Variables of interest; player age, position, shoulder motion, humeral retrotorsion, joint laxity, strength, balance, geography, velocity, pitch count, pitch types, throwing volumes, and throwing mechanics were recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were included in this systematic review. MINORS scores ranged from 75 to 87%, and variables demonstrated significant heterogeneity. Performance-based risk factors for MUCL injury included: increased pitch count (both annual and per game), higher percentage of fastballs thrown, smaller pitch repertoire, and/or a loss of pitching velocity. Biomechanical studies demonstrated the relationship between decreased shoulder range of motion (total ROM, ER, IR, and abduction), increased humeral retrotorsion, increased elbow valgus opening in the throwing arm, lower Y-Balance score, and increased lateral release position to increased MUCL injury. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors for MUCL injury can generally be categorized into 4 primary groups: 1) various player demographics and characteristics, 2) throwing too hard (high velocity), 3) throwing too much (pitch count/volume), and 4) throwing with poor mechanics. In this systematic review, the most significant nonmodifiable risk factors for MUCL injuries included: increased glenohumeral retrotorsion and elbow valgus opening. The most consistent modifiable risk factors included: total shoulder range of motion, pitch count, pitch selection, Y balance score, and lateral release position. Pitch velocity was inconsistent in literature, but most studies found this as a risk for injury. These risk factors may serve as appropriate targets for future evidence-based injury mitigation strategies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

Factors that Increase Elbow Stress in the Throwing Athlete: a Systematic Review of Biomechanical and Motion Analysis Studies of Baseball Pitching and Throwing.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Elbow pain poses a unique challenge in the throwing athlete. Due to the high levels of elbow stress during the throwing motion, elbow injuries are common in throwers of all ages. There are several postulated factors believed to contribute increased stress to the throwing elbow. A detailed review of the published biomechanical studies evaluating the stresses experienced by the throwing elbow is needed. Here, we review these biomechanical studies to extrapolate the contributing factors that increase stress, the modifications that may reduce such stress, and the post-injury rehabilitation that optimizes outcomes and reduces recurrence. RECENT FINDINGS: The biomechanical forces on the elbow have been further investigated delineated in recent work. Rotational malalignment of the shoulder, including both GIRD and decreased adduction, increases torque experienced by the elbow during pitching motions. Exact interactions between lower extremity, lumbopelvic or trunk rotation, and elbow forces during throwing remain uncertain with mixed results in recent literature. Pitch types may influence elbow stresses although delivery mechanism and distance thrown do not. Several biomechanical factors influence the stresses imparted on the throwing elbow. Throwing volume, proper throwing mechanics, and appropriate rehabilitation are likely to be to be the most influential on mitigating unnecessary stresses imparted to the elbow in the throwing athlete. A proper understanding of these factors may reduce the occurrence of these injuries in this population. Moreover, an understanding of proper rehabilitation following injury may ensure optimized results and reduce recurrence.

Advances in the Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tears: Management of Rotator Cuff Tears in the Athlete.

Unique biomechanical factors in the overhead and throwing athlete lead to a spectrum of rotator cuff pathology, usually with progressive lateralization of the supraspinatus footprint. Initial comprehensive nonoperative management is indicated for all athletes. Progression to arthroscopic debridement, repair of concomitant injuries, and possible rotator cuff repair with a transosseous equivalent technique are the current management strategies for athletes when nonoperative management fails.

Risk factors for secondary meniscus tears can be accurately predicted through machine learning, creating a resource for patient education and intervention.

PURPOSE: This study sought to develop and internally validate a machine learning model to identify risk factors and quantify overall risk of secondary meniscus injury in a longitudinal cohort after primary ACL reconstruction (ACLR). METHODS: Patients with new ACL injury between 1990 and 2016 with minimum 2-year follow-up were identified. Records were extensively reviewed to extract demographic, treatment, and diagnosis of new meniscus injury following ACLR. Four candidate machine learning algorithms were evaluated to predict secondary meniscus tears. Performance was assessed through discrimination using area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC), calibration, and decision curve analysis; interpretability was enhanced utilizing global variable importance plots and partial dependence curves. RESULTS: A total of 1187 patients underwent ACLR; 139 (11.7%) experienced a secondary meniscus tear at a mean time of 65 months post-op. The best performing model for predicting secondary meniscus tear was the random forest (AUROC = 0.790, 95% CI: 0.785-0.795; calibration intercept = 0.006, 95% CI: 0.005-0.007, calibration slope = 0.961 95% CI: 0.956-0.965, Brier's score = 0.10 95% CI: 0.09-0.12), and all four machine learning algorithms outperformed traditional logistic regression. The following risk factors were identified: shorter time to return to sport (RTS), lower VAS at injury, increased time from injury to surgery, older age at injury, and proximal ACL tear. CONCLUSION: Machine learning models outperformed traditional prediction models and identified multiple risk factors for secondary meniscus tears after ACLR. Following careful external validation, these models can be deployed to provide real-time quantifiable risk for counseling and timely intervention to help guide patient expectations and possibly improve clinical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Comparison of Posterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Using an All-Inside Technique With and Without Independent Suture Tape Reinforcement.

Background: Biomechanical studies support the use of suture tape reinforcement for limiting graft elongation and increasing strength in knee ligament reconstructions. Purpose: To compare posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) laxity, complication and reoperation rates, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after all-inside single-bundle PCL reconstruction (PCLR) with versus without independent suture tape reinforcement. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent primary, all-inside allograft single-bundle PCLR with and without independent suture tape reinforcement at a single academic institution from 2012 to 2019. Medical records were reviewed for patient characteristics, additional injuries, and concomitant procedures. PRO scores (including the International Knee Documentation Committee [IKDC], Tegner activity scale, and Lysholm scores), bilateral comparison kneeling radiographs, and physical examination findings were collected at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively. Results: Included were 50 patients: 19 with suture tape reinforcement (mean age 30.6 ± 2.9 years) and 31 without suture tape reinforcement (control group; mean age 26.2 ± 1.6 years). One PCLR graft in the suture tape group failed. Posterior drawer examination revealed grade 1+ laxity in 4 of 19 (21%) of the suture tape cohort versus 6 of 31 (19%) of the control cohort (P > .999). Bilateral kneeling radiographs showed similar side-to-side differences in laxity between the groups (suture tape vs control: mean, 1.9 ± 0.4 vs 2.6 ± 0.6 mm; P = .361). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in postoperative IKDC (suture tape vs control: 79.3 vs 79.6; P = .779), Lysholm (87.5 vs 84.3; P = .828), or Tegner activity (5.6 vs 5.7; P = .562) scores. Conclusion: All-inside single-bundle PCLR with and without independent suture tape reinforcement demonstrated low rates of graft failure, complications, and reoperations, with satisfactory PROs at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Radiographic posterior tibial translation was comparable between the 2 groups.

Incidence and Epidemiology of Symptomatic Capitellar Osteochondritis Dissecans of the Elbow: A United States Population-Based Study Over a 25-Year Period.

Background: There are limited data on the incidence of capitellar osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) in the United States (US) population. Purpose: To determine the incidence of symptomatic capitellar OCD in a representative US subpopulation and identify changes in its incidence over time and to investigate the relationship between the incidence of capitellar OCD and patient sex and age. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of patients aged ≤24 years from Olmsted County, Minnesota, with symptomatic capitellar OCD over a 25-year period (1995-2019). Patients with acute osteochondral injuries, Panner disease, and hereditary arthropathy were excluded. Poisson regression was utilized to identify the predictors of a capitellar OCD diagnosis. Incidence rates (per 100,000) were assessed for changes over time. Age groups of younger (10-15 years) versus older (16-24 years) patients were compared. Results: A total of 45 patients (78% male) were identified. The mean age was 14.5 years (range, 10-24 years); 31 patients were in the younger group, and 14 patients were in the older group. Sport participation was seen in 89%of patients; 90% were overhead athletes, and 58% were throwing athletes. The incidence of capitellar OCD was 6.0 per 100,000 overall, 9.5 per 100,000 for male patients, and 2.6 per 100,000 for female patients. The incidence was highest for male patients in the younger group (15.3/100,000) and lowest for female patients in the older group (0.8/100,000). The estimated incidence rate ratio for younger versus older patients was 3.3 (P < .001), and the incidence rate ratio for male versus female patients was 3.5 (P < .001). There were no changes in the incidence of capitellar OCD over time as a continuous or 5-year categorical variable (P = .290 and P = .460, respectively). Overall, 82% of patients were treated surgically. There were no significant changes in surgical rates over time. Conclusion: In this US subpopulation, the overall incidence of symptomatic capitellar OCD between the ages of 10 and 24 years was 6.0 per 100,000 over the 25-year period studied, which is higher than previously reported US estimates. Incidence rates and treatment strategies did not change significantly over time.

Managing Shoulder Instability in the Overhead Athlete.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Shoulder instability in the overhead athlete is a difficult problem because of the balance between necessary laxity for athletic movements and stability of the joint. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the clinical evaluation of shoulder instability in the overhead athlete and present evidence-based management strategies for each subtype of shoulder instability, including novel techniques and outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent investigation has shown that throwers and other overhead athletes are more likely to present with subtle subluxation events rather than discrete dislocations as their primary symptom. While overhead athletes with discrete anterior dislocation events are likely to begin with non-operative management, many progress on to surgical intervention. Surgical management of glenohumeral joint instability continues to pose challenges due to the potential for over-tensioning for the sake of stability at the expense of the adaptive laxity that often confers performance benefits in the overhead athlete. Novel, individualized, and sport/position specific approaches are needed to address this complex issue. The optimal management of shoulder instability in the overhead athlete continues to be a controversial topic due to the complex work-up, an increasing number of surgical options with varying indications, and low volume of high-quality studies comparing any of the treatment options. The Anterior Shoulder Instability International Consensus Group guidelines from February 2022 offer the most updated guidelines on work-up and management. Overall, high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to determine the optimal treatment for specific pathologies and aid in creating patient-centered management plans.

Early ACLR and Risk and Timing of Secondary Meniscal Injury Compared With Delayed ACLR or Nonoperative Treatment: A Time-to-Event Analysis Using Machine Learning.

BACKGROUND: Surgical and nonoperative management of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries seek to mitigate the risk of knee instability and secondary meniscal injury. However, the associated risk and timing of secondary meniscal tears have not been completely elucidated. PURPOSE: To compare risk and timing of secondary meniscal injury between patients receiving nonoperative management, delayed ACL reconstruction (ACLR), and early ACLR using a machine learning survival analysis. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A geographic database was used to identify and review records of patients with a diagnosis of ACL rupture between 1990 and 2016 with minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients undergoing ACLR were matched 1:1 with nonoperatively treated controls. Rate and time to secondary meniscal tear were compared using random survival forest algorithms; independent models were developed and internally validated for predicting injury-free duration in both cohorts. Performance was measured using out-of-bag c-statistic, calibration, and Brier score. Model interpretability was enhanced using global variable importance and partial dependence curves. RESULTS: The study included 1369 patients who underwent ACLR and 294 patients who had nonoperative treatment. After matching, no significant differences in rates of secondary meniscal tear were found (P = .09); subgroup analysis revealed the shortest periods of meniscal survival in patients undergoing delayed ACLR. The random survival forest algorithm achieved excellent predictive performance for the ACLR cohort, with an out-of-bag c-statistic of 0.80 and a Brier score of 0.11. Significant variables for risk of meniscal tear for the ACLR cohort included time to return to sports or activity ≤350 days, time to surgery ≥50 days, age at injury ≤40 years, and high-impact or rotational landing sports, whereas those in the nonoperative cohort model included time to RTS ≤200 days, visual analog scale pain score >3 at consultation, hypermobility, and noncontact sports. CONCLUSION: Delayed ACLR demonstrated the greatest long-term risk of meniscal injury compared with nonoperative treatment or early ACLR. Risk factors for decreased meniscal survival after ACLR included increased time to surgery, shorter time to return to sports or activity, older age at injury, and involvement in high-impact or rotational landing sports. Pending careful external validation, these models may be deployed in the clinical space to provide real-time insights and enhance decision making.

Patient Age and Surgical Intervention as Risk Factors for the Development of Osteoarthritis After Posterior Shoulder Instability: A Population-Based Study.

Background: Diagnosis and treatment of posterior shoulder instability (PSI) has improved with advances in imaging and surgical technique. However, the relationship between PSI and osteoarthritis (OA) remains unclear. Purpose: To evaluate a population-based cohort to (1) determine the rate of symptomatic OA, (2) identify patient characteristic risk factors for OA, and (3) evaluate the effect of posterior capsulolabral repair on OA progression. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: After review of 324 patient records, we included 115 patients (14 female, 101 male) diagnosed with PSI between January 1994 and July 2012 with an average follow-up of 12.5 years (range, 5-23 years). Medical records were reviewed for patient characteristics, injury characteristics, surgical details (if any), and radiographic progression of OA. Kaplan-Meier survival was used to estimate survival free of OA; characteristics associated with OA progression were determined via univariate Cox regression models, and associated 95% CIs and hazard ratios (HRs) are presented. Results: Overall, 14% (16/115) of patients had radiographic progression of symptomatic glenohumeral arthritis, with 5-year survival of 88.3% (95% CI, 79.7%-97.3%). Older age at the time of instability diagnosis was associated with arthritis progression (10-year unit HR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.26-3.03). Patients who underwent surgery demonstrated increased radiographic progression of OA (HR, 4.03; 95% CI, 1.23-13.23). There was a trend of increased OA in patients treated with labral debridement compared with repair despite lower baseline levels of OA; however, this difference was not statistically significant (P = .09). Conclusion: Symptomatic glenohumeral arthritis is not seen routinely in patients with PSI. Although uncommon, an age of at least 30 years at the time of diagnosis and surgical intervention were identified as risk factors for developing symptomatic arthritis at long-term follow-up.

Inside-Out Approach to Meniscus Repair: Still the Gold Standard?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to provide an up-to-date summary on the current literature and trends regarding use of the inside-out approach to meniscus repair. Additionally, the paper describes the authors preferred techniques for inside-out meniscus repair utilizing posteromedial and posterolateral exposures. RECENT FINDINGS: There has been a substantial increase in recent publications regarding meniscus repair. However, comparisons regarding the optimal repair technique have not been conclusive. Despite the recent increase in use of all-inside devices, multiple investigations with short-to-mid-term follow-up have demonstrated similar rates of meniscus healing between inside-out and all-inside repair techniques. Similarly, current literature describes comparable failure rates of around 20%. There are variations in the profile of complications, with all-inside devices having more implant-related complications and inside-out techniques with higher neurovascular injuries. Inside-out meniscus repair is a versatile, cost-effective technique that remains the gold standard for management of most meniscus tear patterns. Through a thoughtful approach, efficient suture retrieval and repair can be performed while protecting critical neurovascular structures. All-inside meniscus repair devices have increased in popularity and surgeon access, but this technique is not without limitations and comparisons to inside-out meniscus repair demonstrates equivocal outcomes.

Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine: Current Controversies for Treatment of Meniscus Root Tears.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The role of the meniscus in preserving the biomechanical function of the knee joint has been clearly defined. The hypothesis that meniscus root integrity is a prerequisite for meniscus function is supported by the development of progressive knee osteoarthritis (OA) following meniscus root tears (MRTs) treated either non-operatively or with meniscectomy. Consequently, there has been a resurgence of interest in the diagnosis and treatment of MRTs. This review examines the contemporary literature surrounding the natural history, clinical presentation, evaluation, preferred surgical repair technique and outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Surgeons must have a high index of suspicion in order to diagnose a MRT because of the nonspecific clinical presentation and difficult visualization on imaging. Compared with medial MRTs that commonly occur in middle age/older patients, lateral meniscus root injuries tend to occur in younger males with lower BMIs, less cartilage degeneration, and with concomitant ligament injury. Subchondral insufficiency fractures of the knee have been found to be associated with both MRTs and following arthroscopic procedures. Meniscus root repair has demonstrated good outcomes, and acute injuries with intact cartilage should be repaired. Cartilage degeneration, BMI, and malalignment are important considerations when choosing surgical candidates. Meniscus centralization has emerged as a viable adjunct strategy aimed at correcting meniscus extrusion. Meniscus root repair results in a decreased rate of OA and arthroplasty and is economically advantageous when compared with nonoperative treatment and partial meniscectomy. The transtibial pull-through technique with the addition of centralization for the medial meniscus is associated with encouraging early results.