Pickleball- and Paddleball-Related Injuries in the Lower Extremity: Description, Treatment Options, and Return to Play.

Background Pickleball and paddleball are the fastest-growing sports in the United States. However, there are limited studies on the types of lower extremity injuries and treatment options in an outpatient clinic setting. Hypothesis/purpose This study reports the incidence rate, treatments, and return-to-play (RTP) outcomes for patients presenting to a single orthopedic outpatient center with pickleball- and paddleball-related lower extremity injuries. Study design This study is a retrospective case series, with level IV evidence. Methods A database search of our multispecialty electronic medical record (EMR) system from 2015 to 2023 identified 166 patients with outpatient pickleball- and paddleball-related lower extremity injuries. The retrospective data were reviewed for patient demographics, injury type, mechanism of injury, surgical or non-surgical treatment, and return-to-play recommendations. Results We observed that the majority of the patients with pickleball- and paddleball-related injuries in the lower extremities were over 60 years of age, with more males. Additionally, most injuries encountered were ankle sprain/strain from a twisting mechanism, which was treated non-surgically. Additionally, a significant number of patients suffered an Achilles tendon rupture (12.0%), which was treated surgically with an Achilles tendon repair (88.1%), accounting for the most common surgical treatment performed in this study. Of the 166 patients who were seen and treated, 68 (40.9%) returned to play, and 93 (56.3%) were lost to follow-up. Conclusion Most of these injuries were seen in the older population and caused by a sprain or strain due to sudden changes in direction, which were treated non-surgically. The most common surgical treatment was an Achilles tendon repair due to an Achilles tendon rupture. Although a relatively good number of patients were cleared to return to play, some patients were lost to follow-up. Meanwhile, some patients were advised to stop playing pickleball or paddleball due to the severity of their injuries. As this sport continues to rise in popularity and with the incidence rate of lower extremity injuries increasing over time, orthopedic surgeons should be aware of the types of injuries, treatment options, and outcomes, as well as ways to advise patients on prevention. Therefore, further research on the standard treatments and outcomes of pickleball- and paddleball-related injuries in the lower extremities is encouraged.

Clinical Outcomes Following Open Olecranon Bursa Excision for Septic and Aseptic Olecranon Bursitis: An Observational Study.

Background and objective Olecranon bursitis (aseptic or septic) is caused by inflammation in the bursal tissue. While it is typically managed with conservative measures, refractory cases may indicate surgical intervention. There is currently limited research about outcomes following bursal excision for both septic and aseptic etiologies. In light of this, the purpose of this study was to determine if patients experienced improvement following surgical olecranon bursa excision and to compare outcomes between septic and aseptic forms. Materials and methods A retrospective review was performed involving patients who underwent olecranon bursa excision from 2014 to 2021. Demographic data, patient characteristics, surgical data, and outcome-related data were collected from the medical records. Patients were classified into subgroups based on the type of olecranon bursitis (septic or aseptic). Preoperative and one-year postoperative 12-item short-form survey (SF-12) results and range of motion (ROM) outcomes were evaluated for the entire cohort as well as the subgroups. Results We included 61 patients in our study and found significant improvement in the Physical Component Scale 12 (PCS-12) score for all patients (42.0 vs. 45.5, p=0.010) following surgery. However, based on subgroup analysis, the aseptic group improved in PCS-12 following surgery (41.5 vs. 46.8, p<0.001), but the septic group did not (43.6 vs. 40.5, p=0.277). No improvements were found in the Mental Component Scale 12 (MCS-12) scores following surgery in either group. Eighteen of the 61 patients experienced postoperative complications (29.5%), but only 6.5% required a second surgical procedure. Specifically, 14 of the 18 complications occurred in the aseptic group while two septic and two aseptic patients required additional surgeries. Elbow ROM did not change significantly after surgery but more patients were found to have full ROM postoperatively (83.0% to 91.8%, p=0.228). Conclusion Our findings suggest that patients with refractory olecranon bursitis, particularly if aseptic, tend to gain significant physical health benefits from open bursectomy.

Arthroscopic Treatment of Shoulder Stiffness With Rotator Cuff Repair Yields Similar Outcomes to Isolated Rotator Cuff Repair.

Purpose: To compare patient-reported and surgical outcome measures in patients with and without secondary shoulder stiffness (SSS) undergoing rotator cuff repair (RCR). Methods: Patients undergoing rotator cuff repair from 2014 to 2020 with complete patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) by the short-form 12 survey (SF-12) were retrospectively reviewed to identify if operative intervention for SSS was performed alongside the RCR. Those patients with operative intervention for SSS were propensity matched to a group without prior intervention for stiffness by age, sex, laterality, body mass index, diabetes mellitus status, and the presence of a thyroid disorder. The groups were compared by rotator cuff tear (RCT) size, surgical outcomes, further surgical intervention, rotator cuff retear rate, postoperative range of motion (ROM), and SF-12 results at 1 year after surgery. Delta values were calculated for component scores of the SF-12 and ROM values by subtracting the preoperative result from the postoperative result. Results: A total of 89 patients with SSS were compared to 156 patients in the control group at final analysis. The patients in the SSS group experienced a significant improvement in the delta mental health component score (MCS-12) of the SF-12 survey that was not seen in the control group (P = .005 to P = .539). Both groups experienced significant improvement by the delta physical health component score (PCS-12) of the SF-12 survey (SSS: 7.68; P < .001; control: 6.95; P < .001). The SSS group also experienced greater improvement of their forward flexion (25.8° vs 12.9°; P = .005) and external rotation (7.13° vs 1.65°; P = .031) ROM than the control group. Conclusions: Operative intervention of SSS at the time of RCR has equivalent postoperative SF-12 survey outcome scores when compared to patients undergoing RCR without preoperative stiffness despite those patients having lower preoperative scores. Level of Evidence: Level III retrospective comparative study.

Surgeon-Performed Saphenous Nerve Block at the Medial Femoral Condyle for Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy and Meniscus Repair: A Randomized Control Trial.

Introduction With the rising number of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy and meniscus repair procedures performed in outpatient surgical centers, there has been significant interest in limiting postoperative pain and optimizing recovery. Postoperative pain is a common reason for admission at these surgical centers, and opioid-related mortality is becoming an increasing concern. A surgeon-performed saphenous nerve block (SNB) represents a promising adjunct treatment option for pain control. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to determine if an SNB would result in decreased postoperative pain and opioid usage compared to control following arthroscopic meniscus repair or partial meniscectomy. Methods We randomized patients between two groups: one receiving an SNB and the other without an SNB. The operating surgeon performed the SNB using a landmark-based approach at the medial femoral epicondyle/adductor hiatus with 5 mL of 1% lidocaine preoperatively and 5 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine postoperatively. Neither ultrasound nor nerve stimulator was utilized to confirm the success of the block. The visual analog scale was utilized to record pain preoperatively and in the immediate postoperative period, one day, and seven to 10 days postoperatively. The nursing staff in the post-anesthesia care unit monitored patient pain levels and provided pain medication accordingly. Results We enrolled 80 patients, with 40 patients in each group. There was no difference in age, sex, body mass index, or laterality between study groups. Overall, there were no differences between groups in preoperative or postoperative pain at any time. The average pain scores preoperatively were 2.78 in the experimental group and 3.05 in the control group (p=0.502). In the immediate postoperative period, pain scores were 1.57 for the experimental group and 2.66 for the control group (p=0.090). No statistically significant difference was detected in the number of patients requiring opioids postoperatively or in the morphine milligram equivalents (MME) provided to patients receiving opioids. Twelve patients in the experimental group received opioids in the immediate postoperative period while 18 patients in the control group received opioids (p=0.248). We observed no adverse events in patients from either group. Conclusion As a pure sensory nerve, the saphenous nerve is an excellent target for pain control without associated leg weakness. We utilized a low-resource SNB in knee arthroscopy for partial meniscectomy and meniscus repair as an adjunct therapy for postoperative pain control. This randomized controlled trial suggests that surgeon-performed blocks via a landmark-based approach are not effective in controlling pain or limiting opioid use in the immediate postoperative period. However, given our lack of confirmatory testing via ultrasound or nerve stimulation, a true nerve block may not have been achieved in all patients. We believe this adds to the external validity of this study, as these tools may not be readily available in all settings.

The Effects of Sleeper and Superman Stretches on Time-Zero Shoulder Range of Motion in Collegiate Athletes.

Purpose This study aimed to determine whether prone cross-body adduction (superman stretch) improves range of motion (ROM) more than the sleeper stretch. Methods Collegiate overhead athletes were randomized to either a sleeper group or a superman stretch group. ROM measurements were collected before and after stretches by three orthopedic surgeons. Results We assessed a total of 212 shoulders. Both stretches demonstrated significant improvements in ROM, except horizontal adduction, which only improved in the superman stretch group. Conclusions The superman stretch may be superior in producing immediate improvements in horizontal adduction when compared to the traditional sleeper stretch.

The Planning Fallacy in the Orthopedic Operating Room.

The planning fallacy posits that humans tend to underestimate the amount of time needed to complete a project and that greater complexity results in a larger difference in that estimation. If this phenomenon is present in the orthopedic operating room, it could lead to negative impacts on patients, their families, and physicians themselves. Nine fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons at one institution were asked to give an estimate of their operative and total room times over the course of three months. Over 759 cases, the surgeons underestimated the total room times by 17.3% (p = 0.034) but did not underestimate their operative times (p = 0.590). The surgeons improved estimation of their operative time for all cases from 13.6 to 10.9 minutes of their actual time (p = 0.031) by comparing the absolute difference for the surgeons' first 25% to the last 25% of cases. Procedures performed at the hospital underestimated operative and total room times by 8.9% and 7.4% compared to the ambulatory center, which overestimated operative times by 6.0% and underestimated total room times by 3.8% (p < 0.001). We found that the planning fallacy does exist in certain situations within the orthopedic operating room.

Treatment Outcomes of Meniscal Root Tears: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To report changes in outcomes for these 3 treatment options for meniscal root tears. METHODS: We systematically searched databases including PubMed, SCOPUS, and ScienceDirect for relevant articles. Criteria from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute was used for a quality assessment of the included studies. A meta-analysis was performed to analyze changes in outcomes for meniscal repair. RESULTS: Nineteen studies, 12 level III and 7 level IV, were included in this systematic review, with a total of 1086 patients. Conversion to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) following partial meniscectomy ranged from 11% to 54%, 31% to 35% for nonoperative, conservative treatment, and 0% to 1% for meniscal repair. Studies comparing repair with either meniscectomy or conservative treatment found greater improvement and slower progression of Kellgren-Lawrence grade with meniscal repair. A meta-analysis of the studies included in the systematic review using forest plots showed repair to have the greatest mean difference for functional outcomes (International Knee Documentation Committee and Lysholm Activity Scale) and the lowest change in follow-up joint space. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who experience meniscal root tears, meniscal repair may provide the greatest improvement in function and lowest risk of conversion to TKA when compared with partial meniscectomy or conservative methods. Partial meniscectomy appears to provide no benefit over conservative treatment, placing patients at a high risk of requiring TKA in the near future. However, future high-quality studies-both comparative studies and randomized trials-are needed to draw further conclusions and better impact treatment decision-making. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of level III and level IV evidence.

Meniscal repair using the FasT-Fix all-inside meniscal repair device.

PURPOSE: We performed a prospective study of meniscal repair using a new all-inside suture meniscal repair device to evaluate its clinical efficacy. TYPE OF STUDY: Prospective case series. METHODS: The results of 42 meniscal tears in 37 patients who underwent meniscal repair using the FasT-Fix device (Smith & Nephew, Andover, MA) were prospectively evaluated. All cases were performed by 1 surgeon (A.A.S.). Preoperative and follow-up evaluation was performed using the objective and subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) criteria as well as Lysholm functional questionnaires. Statistical significance was determined to be P < .05 based on a 2-tailed t test. Relook arthroscopy was performed in 8 patients (9 repairs). Any patient who had a hybrid repair was excluded. RESULTS: The patient population studied, 37 patients comprising 42 meniscal repairs, had an average age of 27 years (range, 13 to 48 years), and an average follow-up of 24.3 months (range, 22 to 27 months). There were 20 male and 18 female patients with 23 medial and 9 lateral repairs; 5 patients had both menisci repaired. All patients had tears in Cooper radial zones 1 and 2 and, thus, had a peripheral meniscal rim of at least 2 mm. All tears were predominantly in the middle and posterior third of the meniscus and 8 tears extended into the posteriormost aspect of the anterior third of the meniscus. An average of 2.8 suture devices was used (range, 1 to 5), predominantly in a vertical or vertical oblique mattress configuration. Forty-two percent were isolated meniscal injuries and 58% had a concurrent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Concomitant procedures were ACL reconstruction in 22, excision of loose body in 1, and excision of a large meniscal cyst in 1. Tear length averaged 2.9 cm (range, 1.5 to 4.5 cm). The success rate by objective IKDC score was 86% (73% normal, 13% nearly normal, and 14% abnormal). Of the 5 clinical failures, 3 were in the isolated group (80% success rate), and 2 were in the ACL group (91% success rate). Both the subjective IKDC and the Lysholm scores statistically improved (IKDC average, 59 preoperative and 92 postoperative; Lysholm average, 69 preoperative and 94 postoperative). There were 8 relook arthroscopies; 5 for failures and 3 for other procedures at which time complete healing was noted. In no case was there articular scuffing from the knots. Removal of a device at the time of surgery was necessary in 5 instances for failure of engagement of the T-Fix bar. An additional FasT-Fix device was then inserted without difficulty in each case. No case of postoperative extra-articular or intra-articular complications was encountered. CONCLUSIONS: The FasT-Fix suture device affords an all-inside method of meniscal repair using a strong vertical or horizontal mattress suture configuration and appears to be a safe and effective technique for meniscal repair for tears with at least a 2-mm peripheral rim. It has a high success rate and low complication rate and has results comparable to classic suture repair techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.