Biomechanical comparison of Tibial-sided supplemental fixation techniques in Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of a commercially available suture anchor and a screw post for supplemental tibial fixation of a bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) graft at time zero. We hypothesized that supplemental fixation using a suture anchor would demonstrate similar biomechanical performance in comparison with a screw post. METHODS: Sixteen fresh frozen, healthy human cadaveric knees underwent BTB autograft harvest, placement, and primary tibial-sided interference screw fixation using a standardized technique performed by a single surgeon. Specimens were randomly assigned to one of two tibial-sided supplemental fixation groups (suture anchor or screw post), yielding eight specimens in each group. Each specimen was affixed to a custom loading apparatus, with the tibial tunnel aligned in a vertical position that allowed for parallel "worst-case scenario" loading and eliminated loading variation due to tibial tunnel angle. Grafts were pretensioned to 30 N and biomechanical performance was compared with respect to cyclical loading between 50-250 N for 500 cycles at 0.5 Hz and pull-to-failure loading at 60 mm/min. RESULTS: The suture anchor and screw post supplemental constructs demonstrated similar performance with respect to all biomechanical parameters assessed, including yield strength (294.0 N [IQR 267.2-304.2 N] versus 332.1 N [IQR 313.8-350.4 N]; P = 0.079) and ultimate strength (330.1 N [IQR 306.9-418.7 N] versus 374.7 N [IQR 362.0-387.3 N]; P = 0.3798). However, of the eight original specimens in each group, one suture anchor specimen (12.5%) and six metallic screw post specimens (75%) failed during cyclical testing and were unable to undergo displacement and load to failure testing. CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary evidence that supplemental tibial-sided fixation of a BTB ACL graft with a suture anchor has similar loading characteristics or load-to-failure strength when compared to supplemental fixation with a screw post construct. STUDY DESIGN: Laboratory Controlled Study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Basic Science Study.

Outcomes after arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff tears in the setting of mild to moderate glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff pathology is a very common source of shoulder pain. Similarly, osteoarthritis of the glenohumeral joint can cause shoulder pain and produce similar symptoms. Surgical management can be indicated for both pathologies, however, outcomes data is limited when examining rotator cuff repair (RCR) in the setting of glenohumeral arthritis (GHOA). Thus, this study sought to determine outcomes for patients who undergo RCR in the setting of GHOA. AIM: To evaluate if a relationship exists between outcomes of RCR in the setting of GHOA. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with concurrent glenohumeral osteoarthritis between 2010-2017. Patients were stratified based on rotator cuff tear size and glenohumeral osteoarthritis severity. Cohorts were paired 1:1 with patients without glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Patients included had a minimum two year follow-up. Rate of conversion to total shoulder arthroplasty, complication rates following initial surgery, and patient-reported outcome measures were collected. RESULTS: A total of 142 patients were included. The number of patients that required total shoulder arthroplasty within two years after index surgery was low. 2/71 (2.8%) patients with GHOA, and 1/71 (1.4%) without GHOA. Following rotator cuff repair, both groups showed favorable patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair showed comparable outcomes to patients without glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

Conversion of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty to reverse shoulder arthroplasty using a unique hybrid glenoid component: technique and preliminary results.

Background: Degenerative arthritis of the shoulder is a common condition that is successfully treated with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Rotator cuff disease has evolved as a leading cause of failure of anatomic TSA, requiring revision to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). This revision procedure can be extremely complex, particularly if removal of a well-fixed glenoid component is necessary. This case series outlines the technique and preliminary clinical results of conversion of anatomic TSA to RSA utilizing both modular humeral and hybrid glenoid components. Methods: From July 2017 to December 2019, the senior author (PMC) performed 84 consecutive anatomic TSA procedures utilizing a modular humeral arthroplasty system and a unique hybrid glenoid component. Three cases (3/84, or 3.6%) required conversion from anatomic TSA to RSA because of postoperative traumatic rotator cuff failure. All modular revision cases were performed without humeral stem removal and with utilization of the existing, well-fixed hybrid glenoid central titanium peg as the foundation for glenoid component revision. Preoperative and postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, visual analog scale pain scores, forward flexion, and patient satisfaction were analyzed in this modular revision group. In addition, several perioperative variables including operative time, blood loss, and length of stay were compared between this modular revision group and a nonmodular anatomic TSA to RSA revision comparative cohort. Results: At an average follow-up of 24 months, average active forward flexion, postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, and visual analog scale pain scores improved significantly compared with preoperative scores in the modular revision group. All three patients were satisfied with their outcome. The average total operative time (109 minutes vs. 154 minutes, P = .02), blood loss (183 cc vs. 500 cc, P = .08), and length of hospital stay (26.3 hours vs. 36.6 hours P < .05) were lower in the modular revision group than those in a nonmodular revision cohort. Conclusion: Revision of anatomic TSA to RSA utilizing a modular humeral system and a convertible hybrid glenoid component that does not require removal of a well-fixed central titanium peg which serves as the foundation for glenoid component revision was performed efficiently, safely, and successfully in three cases. This technique results in significantly improved clinical outcomes when revision to RSA is needed while potentially decreasing perioperative complications in the revision setting.

The Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool Global Rating Scale is a Valid and Reliable Adjunct Measure of Performance on a Virtual Reality Simulator for Hip Arthroscopy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to further evaluate the construct validity and interobserver reliability of a hip arthroscopy virtual simulator using the Arthroscopic Surgery Skill Evaluation Tool (ASSET) global rating scale. METHODS: Thirty participants (23 male/7 female) completed a diagnostic arthroscopy and a loose body retrieval simulation on the VirtaMed Arthros Hip Simulator (Zurich, Switzerland) twice at a minimum of 1 week apart. Subjects consisted of 12 novices (medical students, postgraduate year [PGY] 1-2), 5 intermediate trainees (PGY3-4), 9 senior trainees (PGY5 and fellows), and 4 attending faculty. Simulator metrics were recorded and then compiled to generate a total simulator score (TSS). The loose body retrieval was graded using the ASSET scoring tool. Inter-rater and intrarater reliability for the ASSET for 2 blinded raters and construct validity of the ASSET and the TSS were calculated. Correlation between the TSS, ASSET and individual simulator metrics was determined. RESULTS: Prior simulation experience (P ≤ 0.01) correlated with higher TSS and higher ASSET, while video game experience correlated with higher TSS on the diagnostic module only (P = 0.004). There was a significant difference in ASSET score among all experience groups (P < 0.04). Novices had the lowest mean ASSET whereas experts had the highest mean ASSET with a difference of 17.4 points. Overall performance on the surgical module significantly correlated with the ASSET score (r = 0.444, P = 0.016). There was a significant positive correlation among higher ASSET and number of loose bodies retrieved, operation time, camera path and grasper path length, and percentage of cartilage injury. ASSET demonstrated excellent intrarater reliability and showed substantial or better inter-reliability in 8 of 9 domains. CONCLUSION: The VirtaMed hip arthroscopy simulator demonstrated good construct validity and excellent reliability for simulator-based metrics and ASSET score. Use of both simulator metrics and ASSET offers a more comprehensive performance assessment on hip arthroscopy simulation than either measure alone. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As virtual reality simulation for arthroscopy becomes more commonplace in orthopaedic training, evaluation of the most effective objective and subjective measures of performance is necessary to optimize simulation training.

Return to work after shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: With the rising incidence of shoulder arthroplasty, there is increasing emphasis on improving functional outcomes and ability to return to work (RTW). The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of RTW after shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A literature search of 4 electronic databases was performed from database conception through April 2018 to identify studies reporting data on RTW after shoulder arthroplasty. The primary outcome was the rate of RTW after shoulder arthroplasty. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the rate of RTW across studies. RESULTS: Seven studies were reviewed, including 447 patients at an average follow-up of 4.4 years (range, 1.0-12.6 years). The overall rate of RTW was 63.6% (95% confidence interval, 58.8%-68.2%) at a mean 2.3 months postoperatively (range, 0.3-24.0 months). RTW was significantly lower for patients with heavy-intensity occupations vs. all intensity types (61.7% vs. 67.6%; P = .04). RTW did not differ between anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (63.4%) and hemiarthroplasty (66.1%) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (61.5%; P = .53). There were no significant differences in RTW among underlying diagnoses (osteoarthritis, 64.4%; cuff tear arthropathy, 65.6%; proximal humerus fracture, 69.1%; P = .41) or by workers' compensation status (61.2% vs. 65.3%; P = .41). CONCLUSIONS: A majority of patients return to work after shoulder arthroplasty at an average of 2.3 months postoperatively. Those with heavy-intensity occupation return at significantly lower rates, whereas no differences in RTW by arthroplasty type, underlying diagnosis, or workers' compensation were found.

Management of ulnar collateral ligament injury in throwing athletes: a survey of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Amid evidence that the number of ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) reconstructions performed annually is on the rise, there continues to be significant variation among surgeons in the management of UCL injuries. The purpose of this paper was to survey the members of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) to assess current trends related to the comprehensive treatment of athletes presenting with UCL injury. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to the active members of the ASES. The survey was composed of 3 sections assessing the demographics of the survey-takers, presenting 7 distinct fictional clinical case scenarios of athletes with UCL injury, and posing a series of more general questions about operative and nonoperative management of UCL injuries. RESULTS: There were 159 ASES members who responded to the survey (24% of the active membership); 65 respondents (40.9%) reported >15 years of clinical experience. Of the 7 case scenarios presented, a consensus was reached to indicate the patient for surgery in 4 cases. In all 7 cases, when operative management was the preferred option, a consensus was reached to perform UCL reconstruction. The preferred method of UCL reconstruction among respondents was the docking technique (66.0%); 36.3% of respondents used platelet-rich plasma in their treatment of UCL injuries. CONCLUSION: The survey presented here shows that an overall experienced and well-trained cohort of surgeons tended to agree and often reached consensus opinions on how to approach UCL injury. Professional athletes and those with complete tears were indicated for surgery by consensus, whereas opinion was more divided on how to treat partial tears or nonprofessionals.

The "Safe Zone" Technique Improves Suture Placement and Accuracy During Arthroscopic Remplissage.

In response to recent concerns about the accuracy of suture passage during arthroscopic remplissage, this study was conducted to determine whether a previously described "safe zone" technique can improve the accuracy of suture passage. A recommended safe zone technique was used for arthroscopic remplissage on 6 cadaveric specimens. The safe zone was described as a region at least 1 cm lateral and no greater than 3 cm distal to the posterolateral acromion. Results were compared with a control group of 6 specimens for which the safe zone technique was not used. For each group, 24 suture passes were performed. In the safe zone group, 83.3% (20 of 24) of sutures passed through the infraspinatus tendon. This was a significant improvement compared with the control group, in which only 25% (6 of 24) of sutures pierced the infraspinatus tendon (P<.01). In the safe zone group, 4.2% (1 of 24) of attempted suture passes were placed through the muscle or musculotendinous junction compared with 75% (18 of 24) in the control group (P<.01). Prevention of overmedialization improved significantly with the safe zone technique. In the safe zone group, both anchors had significantly more lateral (6 to 10 mm) suture passage compared with the control group (P<.01). The safe zone technique also showed greater precision of suture passes, and overall precision (SD) improved in 75% of passes. The safe zone technique significantly improved the accuracy of suture penetration into the infraspinatus tendon during arthroscopic remplissage. This reproducible method may help to prevent the reported complications of remplissage. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(4):e598-e603.].

A comparative analysis of work-related outcomes after humeral hemiarthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The return to work of young patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty is increasingly important. Whereas studies have shown superior outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) compared with humeral hemiarthroplasty (HHA), no prior literature has compared RTSA with HHA in regard to return to work. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty registry was performed to analyze all patients who underwent RTSA or HHA at a single institution. A validated questionnaire evaluating return to work postoperatively was administered at baseline and at follow-up in addition to the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and visual analog scale (VAS) pain surveys. RESULTS: The study included 40 RTSA and 41 HHA patients. The average age at surgery was 68.6 years in the RTSA group and 60.8 years in the HHA group (P < .001). Postoperatively, 65% of RTSA patients returned to work compared with 70.7% of HHA patients (P = .64). There was no significant difference in the time to return to work between the RTSA (2.3 months) and HHA (3.1 months) groups (P = .46). Both groups had statistically significant improvements in both the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and VAS scores. The improvement in pain on the VAS for patients undergoing RTSA (-5.6) trended toward significance compared with HHA (-4.2) (P = .056). CONCLUSION: Roughly two-thirds of patients undergoing either HHA or RTSA were able to return to work postoperatively, with no significant difference found between the 2 groups in terms of time to return to work, despite that patients undergoing RTSA were significantly older.

New Joints, Same Old Weight: Weight Changes After Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty.

Obesity is a well-known risk factor for postoperative complications following total joint arthroplasty. However, because the operation is often successful, orthopedic surgeons continue to operate on obese individuals, and many surgeons do so under the assumption that patients will lose weight after they are able to walk and exercise without pain. In this article, we review a recent study by Ast et al., who performed a retrospective review, using a single-center institutional registry, to determine (1) whether patients do actually lose weight after total hip and/or total knee arthroplasty, (2) whether there are predictors of postoperative weight change, and (3) whether postoperative weight changes affect patient-reported clinical outcomes. The principle conclusion was that most patients maintained their body mass index (BMI) after total hip and total knee arthroplasty (73 and 69%, respectively). However, patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty, patients who had a higher preoperative BMI, and female patients were more likely to lose weight postoperatively. When examined in the context of the current literature, this study provides valuable information for the preoperative counseling of total joint arthroplasty candidates, especially in the setting of obesity.