High return to sport rate and good patient-reported outcomes in recreational athletes following simple elbow dislocations.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to investigate outcomes and return to sport metrics in recreational athletes who suffered simple elbow dislocations and were treated operatively or nonoperatively. METHODS: The study included patients between the ages of 16 and 65 who were recreational athletes and had experienced a simple elbow dislocation, with at least 2 years having passed since the injury. Patient-reported outcomes including Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Subjective Elbow Value (SEV), Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were collected. Return to sport metrics were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients (21 females, mean age 43.8 years [95% CI, 39.1-48.5]) who were recreational athletes before their injury completed follow-up at mean 7.6 years (95% CI, 6.7-8.5). There were 29 patients (65.9%) who were treated operatively. Mean MEPS was 93.3 (95% CI, 90.2-96.4), mean SEV was 94.9 (95% CI, 91.9-97.9) and mean OES was 43.3 (95% CI, 41.3-45.4). A total of 36 (81.8%) patients returned to their pre-injury sport. Mean time to return to sport was 21.7 (95% CI, 16.8-26.5) weeks. There was a significant difference in OES (P = .019) and SEV (P = .030) that favored the nonoperative group; however, no significant differences for MEPS, VAS, satisfaction, arc of motion and return to sport were present between groups. A total of five (11.4%) complications were observed and one (2.3%) required revision. CONCLUSIONS: Good outcomes and a high return to sport rate can be expected in recreational athletes following operative and nonoperative treatment of simple elbow dislocations. However, as many as one-in-five patients may not return to pre-injury sport.

Qualitative and Quantitative Anatomy of the Humeral Attachment of the Pectoralis Major Muscle and Structures at Risk: A Cadaveric Study.

Background: Surgical pectoralis major (PM) repair can offer improved functional outcomes over nonoperative treatment. However, there is a lack of literature on consensus of the anatomical site of the humeral attachment. Purpose: To provide qualitative and quantitative anatomic analysis of the PM by focusing on humeral insertion and relevant structures at risk. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: Eight fresh-frozen male cadavers were dissected. The relevant landmarks that were collected and measured included (1) PM footprint length at the humeral insertion (total, sternal head, and clavicular head insertions); (2) PM tendon length from the humeral insertion to the musculotendinous junction; (3) distance from the PM humeral insertion to the lateral (LPN) and medial (MPN) pectoral nerves; and (4) distance from the coracoid process to the musculocutaneous nerve (MCN) in anatomical position. Results: The total PM footprint length was 81.4 mm (95% CI, 71.4-91.3). The sternal and clavicular heads that make up the PM had footprint lengths of 42.1 mm (95% CI, 32.9-51.4) and 56.6 mm (95% CI, 46.5-66.7), respectively. The PM tendon was wider at the clavicular head (74.7 mm; 95% CI, 67.5-81.7) than the sternal head insertions (43.0 mm; 95% CI, 40.1-45.9). The distances from the PM humeral insertion to LPN and MPN were 93.2 mm (95% CI, 83.1-103.3) and 103.8 mm (95% CI, 98.3-109.4), respectively. The coracoid process to MCN distance was 68.5 mm (95% CI, 60.2-76.8). Conclusion: This study successfully quantifies anatomic dimensions of the PM tendon, its sternal and clavicular head insertions, and its location relative to nearby vital structures. Such knowledge can provide surgeons with a better understanding of the PM in relation to nearby neurovascular structures during anatomic PM repair and reconstruction to avoid debilitating complications. Clinical Relevance: Knowledge of the quantitative anatomy of the PM at the humeral footprint along structures at risk may aid surgeons with identifying the injured part of the PM and improve outcomes for anatomic repair and reconstruction.

Neurovascular Anatomic Locations and Surgical Safe Zones When Approaching the Posterior Glenoid and Scapula: A Quantitative and Qualitative Cadaveric Anatomy Study.

Purpose: To characterize the qualitative anatomy of posterior scapula structures encountered with the Judet approach and to perform a quantitative evaluation of these structures' anatomic locations, including their relationships to osseus landmarks to identify safe zones. Methods: Twelve fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders (mean age, 55.2 years; range 41-64 years; 5 left, 7 right) were dissected. A coordinate measuring machine was used to collect the coordinates of anatomic landmarks, structures at risk during surgical approach to the posterior scapula, and the footprints of muscle attachments on the posterior scapula. These coordinates were analyzed for their relationships with clinically relevant anatomy. Results: The suprascapular nerve was a mean of 20.3 mm (18.9-21.7 mm) medial to the glenoid 9-o'clock position. The posterior circumflex artery and vein were a mean of 100.0 mm (92.2-107.7 mm) lateral to along the lateral border of the scapula from the inferior angle of the scapula and a mean of 41 mm (34.2-47.9 mm) medial along the lateral scapular border from the 6-o'clock position on the glenoid rim. The long head of the triceps covers a mean of 132 mm2, and it was found to be contiguous with the glenoid capsule at the 6-o'clock position. Conclusions: A safe zone exists 19 mm medially from the glenoid 9-o'clock position to the suprascapular nerve and a minimum of 34.2 mm medially along the lateral scapular border from the glenoid 6 o'clock to the posterior circumflex scapular artery. Clinical Relevance: The modified Judet approach is a minimally invasive surgery that reduces surgical trauma but necessitates precise knowledge of scapular neurovascular anatomy. Surgeons should be aware of these intervals to help avoid these structures when working near the posterior shoulder. This study may allow us to define neurovascular safe zones when this approach is used.

Concomitant Glenolabral Articular Disruption (GLAD) Lesion is Not Associated With Inferior Clinical Outcomes After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Shoulder Instability: A Retrospective Comparative Study.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes between anterior shoulder instability patients with and without glenolabral articular disruption (GLAD) lesions after undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair and to evaluate potential risk factors for inferior outcomes and recurrent instability. Methods: Prospectively collected data were retrospectively reviewed for patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair with and without GLAD lesions at a minimum of 2 years follow-up. Consecutive patients were matched by age, sex, and number of anchors. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were evaluated before and after surgery, including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand, Short Form-12 score, and satisfaction. Recurrent dislocation, subjective instability, and reoperation were analyzed. Additionally, PROs were assessed on the basis of GLAD lesion characteristics. Results: A total of 54 patients (27 GLAD, 27 control) with a mean age of 28.9 ± 11.6 years were analyzed at mean 4.5 ± 1.9 years (range, 2-9 years) follow-up. Thirty-eight (70.3%) of the participants were male. Patients in both groups experienced significant improvements in all PROs (P ≤ .006 for all measures) and reported high median satisfaction (scale 1-10: 10 vs 10, P = .290) at final follow-up. Two patients in the GLAD cohort and 1 in the control cohort underwent reoperation (P = .588). Four (14.8%) patients in each group reported recurrent dislocation (P = 1.0). Additionally, 2 (7.4%) GLAD patients and 1 (3.7%) control patient reported subjective shoulder instability after surgery (P = 1.0). No significant differences in PROs were observed based on anchor/labral advancement or treatment with microfracture, nor were significant correlations observed between GLAD lesion size and PROs (P > .05 for all). Conclusion: Arthroscopic Bankart repair in patients with GLAD lesions resulted in significantly improved outcomes with high satisfaction, which was no different when compared with those without GLAD lesions. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Anatomic safe zones for arthroscopic snapping scapula surgery: quantitative anatomy of the superomedial scapula and associated neurovascular structures and the effects of arm positioning on safety.

BACKGROUND: Neurovascular anatomy has not been previously quantified for the arthroscopic snapping scapula approach with the patient in the most frequent patient position ("chicken-wing" position). The purposes of this study were (1) to determine anatomic relationships of the superomedial scapula and neurovascular structures at risk during arthroscopic surgical treatment of snapping scapula syndrome (SSS), (2) to compare these measurements between the arm in the neutral position and the arm in the chicken-wing position, and (3) to establish safe zones for arthroscopic treatment of SSS. METHODS: Eight fresh-frozen cadaveric hemi-torsos (mean age, 55.8 years; range, 52-66 years) were dissected to ascertain relevant anatomic structure locations including the (1) spinal accessory nerve, (2) dorsal scapular nerve, and (3) suprascapular nerve. A coordinate measuring device was used to collect data on the relationships of anatomic landmarks and at-risk structures during the surgical approach. RESULTS: The dorsal scapular nerve was a mean of 24.4 mm medial to the superomedial scapula in the neutral position and 33.1 mm medial in the chicken-wing position (P < .001); the dorsal scapular nerve was 21.7 mm medial to the medial border of the scapular spine in the neutral position and 35.5 mm medial in the chicken-wing position (P < .001). The mean distance from the superomedial angle to the spinal accessory nerve intersection at the superior scapular border was 16.5 mm in the neutral position and 15.0 mm in the chicken-wing position (P = .031). The average distance from the superomedial angle to the closest point of the spinal accessory nerve was 11.6 mm and 10.4 mm in the neutral position and chicken-wing position, respectively (P = .039). CONCLUSION: Neurologic structures around the scapula vary significantly between the neutral arm position and the chicken-wing position commonly used in the arthroscopic treatment of SSS. The chicken-wing position improves safe distances for the dorsal scapular nerve during medial-portal placement and should be considered as a primary position for arthroscopic management of SSS.

Outcomes of Arthroscopic Anterior Labroligamentous Periosteal Sleeve Avulsion Lesions: A Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) lesions can occur in recurrent anterior shoulder instability, which may lead to the labrum scarring medially to the glenoid. ALPSA lesions have also been associated with greater preoperative dislocations, larger Hill-Sachs lesions, and greater degrees of glenoid bone loss. Therefore, patients with these lesions have historically had a higher failure rate after repair, with nearly double the recurrent instability rate compared with those undergoing standard arthroscopic Bankart repair. PURPOSE: To compare minimum 2-year outcomes of arthroscopic mobilization and anatomic repair of ALPSA lesions with those after standard arthroscopic Bankart repair. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic repair of ALPSA lesions were matched in a 1-to-3 fashion to patients who underwent standard Bankart repair by age, sex, number of previous ipsilateral shoulder instability surgical procedures, and number of anchors used. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores were compared preoperatively and postoperatively (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES]; 12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12] Physical Component Summary [PCS]; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation [SANE]; shortened version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand; and satisfaction). Recurrent instability, on- versus off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, and reoperation rates were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 100 shoulders (25 ALPSA and 75 Bankart) with an overall mean age of 25.7 years were evaluated. Patients in the ALPSA group demonstrated significant improvements in the ASES (preoperative, 74.8; postoperative, 89.7; P = .041) and SF-12 PCS (preoperative, 46.9; postoperative, 53.4; P = .021) scores but not the SANE score (preoperative, 65.2; postoperative, 75.3; P = .311). Patients in the Bankart group had significant improvements in all outcome scores at final follow-up: ASES (preoperative, 67.1; postoperative, 90.3), SANE (preoperative, 58.0; postoperative, 85.7), and SF-12 PCS (preoperative, 45.3; postoperative, 52.9) (all P < .001). There were no significant differences in PRO scores between the groups preoperatively or postoperatively (P > .05). The median satisfaction for the ALPSA group was 10 of 10 and for the Bankart group it was 9 of 10 (P = .094). There was a significantly higher rate of recurrent dislocation in the ALPSA group (8/25 [32.0%]) compared with the Bankart group (10/75 [13.3%]) (P = .040). Additionally, 5 patients (20.0%) in the ALPSA group underwent revision surgery at a mean of 5.6 years, and 8 patients (10.7%) in the Bankart group underwent revision surgery at a mean of 4.4 years (P = .311). CONCLUSION: Despite improvements in the recognition of and surgical techniques for ALPSA lesions, they still lead to significantly higher postoperative dislocation rates; however, no differences in PRO scores were found. These findings highlight the importance of early surgical interventions in anterior shoulder instability with the hope of lessening recurrent instability and the risk of developing an ALPSA lesion, as well as careful assessment of the quality of soft tissues and other risk factors for recurrence when considering what type of shoulder stabilization procedure to perform.

Outcomes After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Using Margin Convergence Versus Superior Capsular Reconstruction: Should Candidates for Margin Convergence Be Treated With Superior Capsular Reconstruction?

BACKGROUND: Both margin convergence rotator cuff repair (MC-RCR) and superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) result in improved clinical outcomes in the treatment of massive rotator cuff tears (RCTs). The question remains whether it is better to perform MC-RCR using native, albeit occasionally deficient, tissues or to perform primary SCR. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: To compare the clinical results of MC-RCR versus SCR for the treatment of massive RCTs. It was hypothesized that SCR would yield better outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Included were patients who underwent arthroscopic MC-RCR or SCR for massive RCTs performed by a single surgeon between 2014 and 2019. MC-RCR was performed if it was technically possible to close the defect; otherwise, SCR was performed. Outcomes were assessed at 6 months and then annually using American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons; Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation; shortened version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand; 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary; and patient satisfaction scores. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) were compared between groups. Revision surgeries and complications were reported. RESULTS: Included were 46 patients in the MC-RCR group (mean age, 59 ± 8 years) and 46 patients in the SCR group (mean age, 57 ± 7 years); 29 patients in each group were available at 2-year follow-up. Preoperative outcome scores were not significantly different between groups. Within groups, all outcome scores improved from pre- to postoperatively (P < .05), with no significant differences in postoperative scores or patient satisfaction between groups. No significant between-group differences were noted in the percentage of patients who reached the MCID, SCB, and PASS (MCID, 92.3% vs 84.6%; SCB, 80.8% vs 80.8%; and PASS, 66.7% vs 66.7%). SCR had a significantly lower survivorship rate compared with MC-RCR (84.7% vs 100%) (P = .026). CONCLUSION: Both MC-RCR and SCR provided similar improvement in outcomes; however, SCR resulted in a significantly lower survivorship rate at 2 years postoperatively. If an RCT is technically repairable, we recommend that it be repaired primarily, even if MC techniques are needed to close the defect. SCR remains a good option for massive RCTs that are not technically repairable.

Grade III Acromioclavicular Separations Treated With Suspensory Fixation Techniques: A Systematic Review of Level I Through IV Studies.

PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review comparing clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, and complication rates after acute (surgery ≤6 weeks from injury) versus chronic (surgery >6 weeks from injury) acromioclavicular joint reconstructions for grade III injuries using modern suspensory fixation techniques. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature examining acute versus chronic surgical treatment of Rockwood grade III acromioclavicular joint separations using the Cochrane registry, MEDLINE database, and Embase database over the past 10 years according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. The inclusion criteria included techniques using suspensory fixation, a minimum study size of 3 patients, a minimum follow-up period of 6 months, human studies, and English-language studies. The methodology of each study was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) tool for nonrandomized studies and the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB 2) tool for randomized controlled trials. RESULTS: The systematic review search yielded 20 studies with a total of 253 patients. There were 2 prospective randomized controlled trials, but most of the included studies were retrospective. On comparison of acute surgery (≤6 weeks) and chronic surgery (>6 weeks), individual studies reported a range of Constant scores of 84.4 to 98.2 and 80.8 to 94.1, respectively. The ranges of radiographic coracoclavicular distances reported at final follow-up also favored acute reconstructions, which showed improved reduction (9.2-15.7 mm and 11.7-18.6 mm, respectively). The reported complication rates ranged from 7% to 67% for acute reconstructions and from 0% to 30% for chronic reconstructions. CONCLUSIONS: The ranges in the Constant score may favor acute reconstructions, but because of the heterogeneity in the surgical techniques in the literature, no definitive recommendations can be made regarding optimal timing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I through IV studies.

Patient-reported drug and latex allergies negatively affect outcomes after total and reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported allergies (PRAs) have been identified as a risk factor for worse outcomes and less satisfaction in patients undergoing knee and hip arthroplasty. Similar associations have not been elucidated in shoulder arthroplasty patients; however, previous research is sparse. The purpose of this study was to assess the outcomes following shoulder arthroplasty surgery with respect to patient-reported drug allergies. It was hypothesized that a higher number of allergies would be associated with worse patient-reported outcomes (PROs) following shoulder arthroplasty surgery. METHODS: Consecutive patients aged 18-89 years at the time of surgery who underwent primary shoulder arthroplasty between October 2005 and March 2018 performed by a single surgeon and had a minimum follow-up period of 1 year were reviewed. PRO scores, including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation score, QuickDASH (short version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire) score, and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary scores, as well as patient satisfaction, were collected preoperatively and postoperatively. Early clinical failures were reported. Subjects were categorized into a 3-level factor based on the number of PRAs (0, 1, or ≥2), and bivariate comparisons of mean postoperative PRO scores were performed using Kruskal-Wallis analyses. Additionally, multivariate regression was performed to assess the effect of PRAs on PROs while controlling for age, sex, arthroplasty type, baseline PRO scores, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. RESULTS: Overall, 411 shoulders were included in the final study population (367 patients, 44 of whom were treated bilaterally). The population was predominately male patients (n = 265, 64.5%), and the median age at the time of surgery was 66.5 years (first quartile-third quartile, 61.3-71.4 years). Of the patients, 253 (61.6%) underwent total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) whereas 158 (38.4%) underwent reverse TSA. Five patients (2 TSA and 3 reverse TSA patients) experienced early clinical failure and required revision surgery. Minimum 1-year PROs were obtained for 345 of 406 patients (85.0%) with a mean follow-up period of 1.9 ± 1.2 years. Nearly all postoperative PROs reflected a trend of worse outcomes with more preoperative PRAs; however, the QuickDASH score was the only score showing a significant difference between allergy groups (P = .004). Pair-wise comparison using Nemenyi post hoc testing showed that the QuickDASH score was significantly higher (worse outcomes) for the group with ≥2 allergies compared with the group with 0 allergies. PRA was found to be a statistically significant predictor of higher postoperative QuickDASH scores (P = .043) and was more influential than the Charlson Comorbidity Index and sex. Additionally, PRA was the only statistically significant predictor of patient satisfaction (P = .016). CONCLUSION: An increasing number of preoperative PRAs is associated with worse PROs and patient satisfaction following shoulder arthroplasty. The number of PRAs was the most influential predictor of patient satisfaction.

Complex Revision Glenoid Reconstruction with Use of a Distal Tibial Allograft.

BACKGROUND: Coracoid transfer procedures have been increasingly utilized for anterior shoulder instability with associated glenoid bone loss1. Unfortunately, in a young, high-risk patient population, these procedures can fail secondary to traumatic causes but also because of bone graft resorption or malposition or hardware prominence, among other reasons2. In active patients, revision glenoid reconstruction may be indicated. Distal tibial osteoarticular allografts have been utilized to treat recurrent anterior shoulder instability for several years3. Recently, this technique has been applied to cases of failed Latarjet procedures in order to reconstitute the absent glenoid bone stock4, demonstrating excellent clinical outcomes at a minimum follow-up of 3 years2. DESCRIPTION: The procedure is performed in the beach-chair position. First, a diagnostic shoulder arthroscopy is performed to assess the cartilaginous surfaces, to examine the Hill-Sachs lesion and its engagement, and to remove any loose bodies. Next, the prior deltopectoral incision is developed, and the deltopectoral interval is utilized to visualize the subscapularis. The subscapularis is split at the junction of its upper two-thirds and lower one-third. Careful dissection is used to develop the subscapularis split from lateral to medial because the prior coracoid transfer affects the native neurovascular anatomy medially. If substantial coracoid bone remains from the previous transfer, a conjoined tendon tenotomy can be performed to further aid in visualization5. Next, any associated hardware is removed, and the coracoid bone remnant is removed. The glenoid defect is sized, and the osseous glenoid bed is prepared. A fresh-frozen distal tibial allograft is then fashioned, washed of marrow elements, and enhanced with platelet-rich plasma before being fixed to the glenoid with use of 2 cortical screws in a lagged fashion. The capsule and subscapularis split are then closed to complete the repair. ALTERNATIVES: Alternatives to revision glenoid reconstruction with distal tibial allograft include reconstruction with an iliac crest autograft, distal clavicular autograft, revision coracoid transfer, or nonoperative treatment through rehabilitation and activity modification. RATIONALE: In cases of failed coracoid transfer for anterior shoulder instability with associated glenoid bone loss, distal tibial allograft is the superior revision treatment option for several reasons: it allows for an osteoarticular graft, offers flexibility in terms of graft size, and requires no donor-site morbidity. Distal tibial allograft allows active, high-risk patients to have restored and maintained stability with low complication and graft-resorption rates2. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: Glenoid reconstruction with a distal tibial allograft is associated with improved patient-reported outcomes from preoperatively, as well as recurrence rates of <10% and graft-union rates of >90%2. IMPORTANT TIPS: Initiating the procedure with an arthroscopic evaluation allows for a complete diagnostic examination, including the Hill-Sachs lesion, articular cartilage, and rotator cuff, as well as removal of any loose bodies, which are frequently present and sometimes difficult to visualize and access during the open procedure.A subscapularis split allows for maintenance of the subscapularis insertion on the lesser tuberosity as well as minimal disruption of the muscle fibers.A conjoined tendon tenotomy can provide improved access for hardware removal if the coracoid bone graft from the prior transferred coracoid is present.A 5.5-mm arthroscopic burr is utilized to decorticate the anterior aspect of the glenoid, which facilitates graft union because the burr allows built-in suction capability during constant irrigation, minimizing the possibility of heat necrosis.The distal tibial allograft is thoroughly lavaged to remove residual marrow elements prior to insertion in order to diminish potential immunogenicity.Two solid, fully threaded 3.5-mm cortical screws are placed in a lagged fashion to fix the distal tibial allograft to the glenoid.

Posterior Glenoid Reconstruction Using a Distal Tibial Allograft.

Posterior shoulder instability is increasingly recognized and diagnosed in young athletes. These patients often present with vague shoulder pain rather than the frank instability commonly seen with anterior instability. Three common causes of posterior shoulder instability are congenital retroversion, a single traumatic event, or repetitive microtrauma with erosive effects. The critical determination when deciding on the appropriate treatment of posterior shoulder instability is the presence and degree of glenoid bone loss. In patients without bone loss, arthroscopic procedures have a high success rate with a failure rate of less than 10% and an 89% return-to-sport rate. The determination of the critical amount of bone loss that would permit an arthroscopic procedure is controversial, but recent reports that attempt to quantify the critical bone loss value posteriorly have ranged from 13.5% to 20%. This Technical Note describes our preferred method of open surgical treatment of posterior shoulder instability with posterior glenoid bone loss using an intra-articular distal tibial allograft.

Minimum 10-Year Outcomes of Primary Arthroscopic Transosseous-Equivalent Double-Row Rotator Cuff Repair.

BACKGROUND: Modern rotator cuff repair techniques demonstrate favorable early and midterm outcomes, but long-term results have yet to be reported. PURPOSE: To determine 10-year outcomes and survivorship after arthroscopic double-row transosseous-equivalent (TOE) rotator cuff repair. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence 4. METHODS: The primary TOE rotator cuff repair procedure was performed using either a knotted suture bridge or knotless tape bridge technique on a series of patients with 1 to 3 tendon full-thickness rotator cuff tears involving the supraspinatus. Only patients who were 10 years postsurgery were included. Patient-reported outcomes were collected pre- and postoperatively, including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), and satisfaction. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed. Failure was defined as progression to revision surgery. RESULTS: A total of 91 shoulders (56 men, 31 women) were included between October 2005 and December 2009. Mean follow-up was 11.5 years (range, 10.0-14.1 years). Of 91 shoulders, 5 (5.5%) failed and required revision surgery. Patient-reported outcomes for patients who survived were known for 80% (69/86). Outcomes scores at final follow-up were as follows: ASES, 93.1 ± 10.8; SANE, 87.5 ± 14.2; QuickDASH, 11.1 ± 13.5; and SF-12 physical component summary (PCS), 49.2 ± 10.1. There were statistically significant declines in ASES, SANE, and SF-12 PCS from the 5-year to 10-year follow-up, but none of these changes met the minimally clinically important difference threshold. Median satisfaction at final follow-up was 10 (range, 3-10). From this cohort, Kaplan-Meier survivorship demonstrated a 94.4% survival rate at a minimum of 10 years. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic TOE rotator cuff repair demonstrates high patient satisfaction and low revision rates at a mean follow-up of 11.5 years. This information may be directly utilized in surgical decision making and preoperative patient counseling regarding the longevity of modern double-row rotator cuff repair.

Mid-Term Outcomes of Arthroscopically-Assisted Anatomic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction Using Tendon Allograft for High-Grade Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocations.

PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to assess clinical and radiographic outcomes of arthroscopically-assisted, anatomic coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction using tendon allograft (AA-ACCR) for the treatment of Rockwood type III-V injuries at minimum 2-year follow-up and to perform subgroup analyses of clinical and radiographic outcomes for acute versus chronic and type III versus type IV-V injuries. METHODS: In this retrospective study of prospectively collected data, patients who underwent primary AA-ACCR for the treatment of type III-V dislocations and had minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) were collected, including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Single Numeric Assessment Evaluation score, Short Form-12 Physical Component Summary, Quick Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand score, and patient satisfaction. Preoperative and postoperative coracoclavicular distance (CCD) was obtained. PROs and CCD were reported for the total cohort and for the subgroups. Complication and revision rates were demonstrated. RESULTS: In total, 102 patients (10 women, 92 men) with a mean age of 45.0 years (range, 18-73 years) were included. There were 13 complications (12.7%) resulting in revision surgery. After exclusion of revised patients, PROs were available for 69 (77.5%). At mean follow-up of 4.7 years (range, 2.0-12.8 years), all PROs improved significantly (P < .001). Median patient satisfaction was 9.0 (interquartile range, 8.0-10.0). Median preoperative to postoperative CCD decreased significantly (P < .001). Subgroup analyses revealed significant improvements in all PROs and CCD from preoperative to postoperative for both acute and chronic, and type III and type IV-V dislocations (P < .05) with no significant differences in postoperative PROs and satisfaction between (P > .05). CONCLUSION: AA-ACCR for high-grade acromioclavicular joint injuries resulted in high postoperative PROs and patient satisfaction with significant improvements from before to after surgery in those who did not undergo revision surgery. Furthermore, subgroup analyses revealed that acute and chronic, and type III and type IV-V injuries benefitted similarly from AA-ACCR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV; therapeutic case series.

Total Shoulder Arthroplasty After Previous Arthroscopic Surgery for Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis: A Case-Control Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: When comprehensive arthroscopic management (CAM) for glenohumeral osteoarthritis fails, total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) may be needed, and it remains unknown whether previous CAM adversely affects outcomes after subsequent TSA. PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis who underwent TSA as a primary procedure with those who underwent TSA after CAM (CAM-TSA). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Patients younger than 70 years who underwent primary TSA or CAM-TSA and were at least 2 years postoperative were included. A total of 21 patients who underwent CAM-TSA were matched to 42 patients who underwent primary TSA by age, sex, and grade of osteoarthritis. Intraoperative blood loss and surgical time were assessed. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores were collected preoperatively and at final follow-up including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), shortened version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS), visual analog scale, and patient satisfaction. Revision arthroplasty was defined as failure. RESULTS: Of 63 patients, 56 of them (19 CAM-TSA and 37 primary TSA; 88.9%) were available for follow-up. There were 16 female (28.6%) and 40 male (71.4%) patients with a mean age of 57.8 years (range, 38.8-66.7 years). There were no significant differences in intraoperative blood loss (P > .999) or surgical time (P = .127) between the groups. There were 4 patients (7.1%) who had failure, and failure rates did not differ significantly between the CAM-TSA (5.3%; n = 1) and primary TSA (8.1%; n = 3) groups (P > .999). Additionally, 2 patients underwent revision arthroplasty because of trauma. A total of 50 patients who did not experience failure (17 CAM-TSA and 33 primary TSA) completed PRO measures at a mean follow-up of 4.8 years (range, 2.0-11.5 years), with no significant difference between the CAM-TSA (4.4 years [range, 2.1-10.5 years]) and primary TSA (5.0 years [range, 2.0-11.5 years]) groups (P = .164). Both groups improved significantly from preoperatively to postoperatively in all PRO scores (P < .05). No significant differences in any median PRO scores between the CAM-TSA and primary TSA groups, respectively, were seen at final follow-up: ASES: 89.9 (interquartile range [IQR], 74.9-96.6) versus 94.1 (IQR, 74.9-98.3) (P = .545); SANE: 84.0 (IQR, 74.0-94.0) versus 91.5 (IQR, 75.3-99.0) (P = .246); QuickDASH: 9.0 (IQR, 3.4-27.3) versus 9.0 (IQR, 5.1-18.1) (P = .921); SF-12 PCS: 53.8 (IQR, 50.1-57.1) versus 49.3 (IQR, 41.2-56.5) (P = .065); and patient satisfaction: 9.5 (IQR, 7.3-10.0) versus 9.0 (IQR, 5.3-10.0) (P = .308). CONCLUSION: Patients with severe glenohumeral osteoarthritis who failed previous CAM benefited similarly from TSA compared with patients who opted directly for TSA.

Quantitative T2 mapping of the glenohumeral joint cartilage in asymptomatic shoulders and shoulders with increasing severity of rotator cuff pathology.

PURPOSE: To examine the relationship between glenohumeral cartilage T2 mapping values and rotator cuff pathology. METHOD: Fifty-nine subjects (age 48.2 ±â€¯13.5 years, 15 asymptomatic volunteers and 10 tendinosis, 13 partial-thickness tear, 8 full-thickness tear, and 13 massive tear patients) underwent glenohumeral cartilage T2 mapping. The humeral head cartilage was segmented in the sagittal and coronal planes. The glenoid cartilage was segmented in the coronal plane. Group means for each region were calculated and compared between the groups. RESULTS: Massive tear group T2 values were significantly higher than the asymptomatic group values for the humeral head cartilage included in the sagittal (45 ±â€¯7 versus 32 ±â€¯4 ms, p <  .001) and coronal (44 ± 6 versus 38 ± 1 ms, p =  0.01) plane images. Mean T2 was also significantly higher for massive than full-thickness tears (45 ± 7 versus 38 ± 5 ms, p =  0.02), massive than partial-thickness tears (45 ± 7 versus 34 ± 4 ms, p <  0.001), and massive tears than tendinosis (45 ± 7 versus 35 ± 4 ms, p =  0.001) in the sagittal-images humeral head region and significantly higher for massive tears than asymptomatic shoulders (44 ± 6 versus 38 ± 1 ms, p =  0.01) in the coronal-images humeral head region. CONCLUSION: Humeral head cartilage T2 values were significantly positively correlated with rotator cuff pathology severity. Massive rotator cuff tear patients demonstrated significantly higher superior humeral head cartilage T2 mapping values relative to subjects with no/lesser degrees of rotator cuff pathology.

Quantitative and Qualitative Surgical Anatomy of the Acromioclavicular Joint Capsule and Ligament: A Cadaveric Study.

BACKGROUND: The acromioclavicular (AC) capsule and ligament have been found to play a major role in maintaining horizontal stability. To reconstruct the AC capsule and ligament, precise knowledge of their anatomy is essential. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purposes of this study were (1) to determine the angle of the posterosuperior ligament in regard to the axis of the clavicle, (2) to determine the width of the attachment (footprint) of the AC capsule and ligament on the acromion and clavicle, (3) to determine the distance to the AC capsule from the cartilage border of the acromion and clavicle, and (4) to develop a clockface model of the insertion of the posterosuperior ligament on the acromion and clavicle. It was hypothesized that consistent angles, attachment areas, distances, and insertion sites would be identified. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive laboratory study. METHODS: A total of 12 fresh-frozen shoulders were used (mean age, 55 years [range, 41-64 years]). All soft tissue was removed, leaving only the AC capsule and ligament intact. After a qualitative inspection, a quantitative assessment was performed. The AC joint was fixed in an anatomic position, and the attachment angle of the posterosuperior ligament was measured using a digital protractor. The capsule and ligament were removed, and a coordinate measuring device was utilized to assess the width of the AC capsule footprint and the distance from the footprint to the cartilage border of the acromion and clavicle. The AC joint was then disarticulated, and the previously marked posterosuperior ligament insertion was transferred into a clockface model. The mean values across the 12 specimens were demonstrated with 95% CIs. RESULTS: The mean attachment angle of the posterosuperior ligament was 51.4° (95% CI, 45.2°-57.6°) in relation to the long axis of the entire clavicle and 41.5° (95% CI, 33.8°-49.1°) in relation to the long axis of the distal third of the clavicle. The mean clavicular footprint width of the AC capsule was 6.4 mm (95% CI, 5.8-6.9 mm) at the superior clavicle and 4.4 mm (95% CI, 3.9-4.8 mm) at the inferior clavicle. The mean acromial footprint width of the AC capsule was 4.6 mm (95% CI, 4.2-4.9 mm) at the superior side and 4.0 mm (95% CI, 3.6-4.4 mm) at the inferior side. The mean distance from the lateral clavicular attachment of the AC capsule to the clavicular cartilage border was 4.3 mm (95% CI, 4.0-4.6 mm), and the mean distance from the medial acromial attachment of the AC capsule to the acromial cartilage border was 3.1 mm (95% CI, 2.9-3.4 mm). On the clockface model of the right shoulder, the clavicular attachment of the posterosuperior ligament ranged from the 9:05 (range, 8:00-9:30) to 11:20 (range, 10:00-12:30) position, and the acromial attachment ranged from the 12:20 (range, 11:00-1:30) to 2:10 (range, 13:30-14:40) position. CONCLUSION: The finding that the posterosuperior ligament did not course perpendicular to the AC joint but rather was oriented obliquely to the long axis of the clavicle, in combination with the newly developed clockface model, may help surgeons to optimally reconstruct this ligament. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our results of a narrow inferior footprint and a short distance from the inferior AC capsule to cartilage suggest that proposed reconstruction of the AC joint capsule should focus primarily on its superior portion.

The Association of Surgical Timing and Injury Severity With Systemic Complications in Severely Injured Patients With Pelvic Ring Injuries.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relationship between timing of definitive fixation, injury severity, and the development of systemic complications in severely injured patients with pelvic ring injuries. DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTINGS: Level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS: One hundred eighteen severely injured [Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≥ 16] adult patients with pelvic ring injuries undergoing definitive fixation, excluding patients treated with external fixation for hemodynamic instability. INTERVENTION: Early fixation (≤36 hours) in 37 patients and delayed fixation (>36 hours) in 81 patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Systemic complications (acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, sepsis, multi-organ failure, and death). RESULTS: The delayed fixation group had a higher ISS and had more patients with chest injuries. There was no detectable difference in the number of patients with systemic complications between early versus delayed fixation groups [8 (22%) vs. 29 (35%), P = 0.1]. The only difference detected in specific complications was a higher incidence of pneumonia with delayed fixation [16 (20%) vs. 0 (0%), P = 0.004] with 11 of the 16 cases being associated with chest injury. Univariate analysis showed an association between complication and time to fixation, ISS, Glasgow Coma Scale, pH, base excess, and injuries to the head, chest, and abdomen. On multivariate analysis, only ISS remained significantly associated with the development of complications [Odds ratio 2.6 per 10 point increase, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.4-4.4]. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that the severity of injury is most highly associated with systemic complications after definitive fixation of pelvic ring injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Concomitant Biceps Tenodesis Improves Outcomes for SLAP Repair: Minimum 2-Year Clinical Outcomes after SLAP II-IV Repair Versus Tenodesis Versus Both.

PURPOSE: To investigate clinical outcomes, return to sport, and complication rate in patients with an isolated SLAP II-IV tear treated with biceps tenodesis (BT), SLAP-repair (SLAP-R), or both (SLAP-R+BT). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed in patients who underwent surgery between February 2006 and February 2018 for isolated SLAP II-IV lesions with either BT, SLAP-R, or SLAP-R+BT and had minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients were excluded if they were older than 45 years of age, had anterior shoulder instability, rotator cuff tears, glenohumeral osteoarthritis, or concomitant fractures about the shoulder. Clinical outcomes were assessed by the use of the American Shoulder and Elbow Society Score, Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation Score, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, and Shoulder and Hand Score, the General Health Short Form-12 Physical Component, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: There were 38 shoulders in the isolated BT group with 1 (2.6%) shoulder requiring revision, 13 in the SLAP-R group with no patient requiring revision, and 21 in the SLAP-R+BT group with 2 (9.5%) shoulders requiring revision. Minimum 2-year follow-up was obtained in >85% of each group. Mean age at time of surgery was significantly different between the groups (36.5 years BT vs 27.7 years SLAP-R vs 36.5 years SLAP-R+BT; P = .003). While patient-reported outcomes improved significantly from pre- to postoperatively for the BT (P < .001) and SLAP-R+BT groups (P < .001), they did not significantly improve for the isolated SLAP-R group (P values ranging .635 to .123). The BT and SLAP-R+BT groups showed significant improvement in return to sport pre- to postoperatively whereas the SLAP-R group did not. The SLAP-R+BT group had the most patients reaching minimal clinical important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptom state American Shoulder and Elbow Society Score scores; however, this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: SLAP II-IV lesions treated with BT or both SLAP-R+BT demonstrated improved outcomes compared with isolated SLAP-R at minimum 2-year follow-up. Concomitant biceps tenodesis should be considered when performing repair of SLAP II-IV tears. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III; Retrospective comparative study.

Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Suprascapular Nerve Decompression for Suprascapular Neuropathy.

PURPOSE: To report clinical outcomes following arthroscopic suprascapular nerve (SSN) decompression for suprascapular neuropathy at the suprascapular and/or spinoglenoid notch in the absence of major concomitant pathology. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data of 19 patients who underwent SSN release at the suprascapular and/or spinoglenoid notch between April 2006 and August 2017 with ≥2 years of follow-up. Patients who underwent concomitant rotator cuff or labral repairs or had severe osteoarthritis were excluded. Pre- and postoperative strength and patient-reported outcomes were collected, including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH), 12-item Short Form (SF-12), and satisfaction. Complications and revisions were recorded. RESULTS: At a mean final follow-up of 4.8 years, pre- to postoperative ASES (64.9 ± 18.7 versus 83.5 ± 23.1; P = .018), QuickDASH (28.7 ± 17.2 versus 12.7 ± 17.1; P = .028), SANE (64.3 ± 16.4 versus 80.8 ± 22.3; P = .034), and SF-12 PCS (41.1 ± 10.8 versus 52.3 ± 5.8; P = .007) scores all significantly improved. Median strength for external rotation improved significantly (4 [range 2 to 5] versus 5 [range 3 to 5]; P = .014). There was no statistically significant improvement in median strength for abduction (4 [range 3 to 5] versus 5 [5]; P = .059). Median postoperative satisfaction was 9 (range 1 to 10), with 8 patients (50%) rating satisfaction ≥9. No complications were observed, and no patients went on to revision surgery. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic SSN decompression for suprascapular neuropathy at the suprascapular and/or spinoglenoid notch in the absence of major concomitant glenohumeral pathology results in good functional outcomes with significant improvements from before to after surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, therapeutic case series.

Survivorship and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Comprehensive Arthroscopic Management of Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis: Minimum 10-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Few long-term outcome studies exist evaluating glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) treatment with arthroscopic management. PURPOSE: To determine outcomes, risk factors for failure, and survivorship for the comprehensive arthroscopic management (CAM) procedure for the treatment of GHOA at minimum 10-year follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: The CAM procedure was performed on a consecutive series of patients with advanced GHOA who opted for joint preservation surgery and otherwise met criteria for total shoulder arthroplasty. At minimum 10-year follow-up, postoperative outcome measures included change in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary, and visual analog scale for pain, along with the QuickDASH (shortened version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) and satisfaction score. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed, with failure defined as progression to arthroplasty. RESULTS: In total, 38 CAM procedures were performed with 10-year minimum follow-up (range, 10-14 years) with a mean patient age of 53 years (range, 27-68 years) at the time of surgery. Survivorship was 75.3% at 5 years and 63.2% at minimum 10 years. Those who progressed to arthroplasty did so at a mean 4.7 years (range, 0.8-9.6 years). For those who did not undergo arthroplasty, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores significantly improved postoperatively at 5 years (63.3 to 89.6; P < .001) and 10 years (63.3 to 80.6; P = .007). CAM failure was associated with severe preoperative humeral head incongruity in 93.8% of failures as compared with 50.0% of patients who did not go on to arthroplasty (P = .008). Median satisfaction was 7.5 out of 10. CONCLUSION: Significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes were sustained at minimum 10-year follow-up in young patients with GHOA who underwent a CAM procedure. The survivorship rate at minimum 10-year follow-up was 63.2%. Humeral head flattening and severe joint incongruity were risk factors for CAM failure. The CAM procedure is an effective joint-preserving treatment for GHOA in appropriately selected patients, with sustained positive outcomes at 10 years.