Subacromial Balloon Spacer Implantation Is a Promising Alternative for Patients With Massive Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To provide an overview of the existing literature on subacromial balloon spacers for the treatment of massive irreparable rotator cuff tears, in an effort to inform surgeons of the procedure's clinical effectiveness. METHODS: The PubMed, Scopus, and Ovid EMBASE databases were queried to identify studies evaluating the clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes of patients indicated for subacromial balloon spacer implantation. The following datapoints were extracted: study demographics, patient baseline characteristics, and postoperative outcomes of interest. Outcomes were evaluated at baseline and at the longest available follow-up period. RESULTS: A total 766 patients were included among 22 included studies, with an average follow-up of 27.54 months. Improvements were seen for all clinical and patient-reported outcomes: forward elevation (ranging from 9.20 to 90.00° improvement), external rotation (ranging from 2.00 to 22.00°), abduction (ranging from 14.00 to 95.00°), Total Constant Score (ranging from 7.70 to 50.00), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ranging from 24.60 to 59.84), Oxford Shoulder Score (ranging from 7.20 to 22.20), and pain score (ranging from 3.57 to 6.50). Minimal differences were seen in acromiohumeral interval (ranging from -2.00 to 1.27). Reoperation and complication rates ranged from 0% to 33% and 0% to 19.64%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The short-term results of subacromial balloon spacers for management of massive rotator cuff tears demonstrate clinically relevant improvements in shoulder range of motion and substantial improvements in patient-reported outcome measures. Of note, minimal change in acromiohumeral interval was seen on postoperative radiography, and wide variations in complication and reoperation rates were reported across studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

Rehabilitation Principles to Consider for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Repair.

CONTEXT: Injury to the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is among the most common orthopaedic injuries, and reconstruction of a ruptured ACL is a common orthopaedic procedure. In general, surgical intervention is necessary to restore stability to the injured knee, and to prevent meniscal damage. Along with surgery, intense postoperative physical therapy is needed to restore function to the injured extremity. ACL reconstruction (ACLR) has been the standard of care in recent decades, and advances in surgical technology have reintroduced the prospect of augmented primary repair of the native ACL via a variety of methods. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A search of PubMed database of articles and reviews available in English was performed through 2020. The search terms ACLR, anterior cruciate ligament repair, bridge enhanced acl repair, suture anchor repair, dynamic intraligamentary stabilization, internal bracing, suture ligament augmentation, and internal brace ligament augmentation were used. STUDY DESIGN: Clinical review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 5. RESULTS: No exact consensus exists on effective rehabilitation protocols after ACL repair techniques, as the variation in published protocols seem even greater than the variation in those for ACLR. For some techniques such as internal bracing and dynamic interligamentary stabilization, it is likely permissible for the patients to progress to full weightbearing and discontinue bracing sooner. However, caution should be applied with regard to earlier return to sport than after ACLR as to minimize risk for retear. CONCLUSION: More research is needed to address how physical therapies must adapt to these innovative repair techniques. Until that is accomplished, we recommend that physical therapists understand the differences among the various ACL surgery techniques discussed here and work with the surgeons to develop a rehabilitation protocol for their mutual patients. STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATION TAXONOMY (SORT): C.

Tendon and Ligament Healing and Current Approaches to Tendon and Ligament Regeneration.

Ligament and tendon injuries are common problems in orthopedics. There is a need for treatments that can expedite nonoperative healing or improve the efficacy of surgical repair or reconstruction of ligaments and tendons. Successful biologically-based attempts at repair and reconstruction would require a thorough understanding of normal tendon and ligament healing. The inflammatory, proliferative, and remodeling phases, and the cells involved in tendon and ligament healing will be reviewed. Then, current research efforts focusing on biologically-based treatments of ligament and tendon injuries will be summarized, with a focus on stem cells endogenous to tendons and ligaments. Statement of clinical significance: This paper details mechanisms of ligament and tendon healing, as well as attempts to apply stem cells to ligament and tendon healing. Understanding of these topics could lead to more efficacious therapies to treat ligament and tendon injuries. © 2019 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 38:7-12, 2020.

Evaluation of preoperative pain in patients undergoing shoulder surgery using the PROMIS pain interference computer-adaptive test.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computerized adaptive testing Pain Interference (PROMIS PI) item bank in patients undergoing shoulder surgery. We hypothesized that PROMIS PI would exhibit a strong positive correlation with the numerical pain scale for the operative shoulder (shoulder NPS) with less floor and ceiling effects. Secondary study aims included assessing the relationships between patient characteristics and PROMIS PI. DESIGN: Analytical cross-sectional study. SETTING: Urban academic medical center. PATIENTS: One-hundred and ninety-five patients undergoing shoulder surgery between June 2015 to June 2017. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All patients completed a series of patient-reported outcomes measures, including PROMIS PI and NPS. Non-parametric tests were used for bivariate analysis. Multivariable regression models were used to determine independent associations. RESULTS: There was a moderate correlation between the PROMIS PI and shoulder NPS scores (rs = 0.53; p < 0.001). PROMIS PI had no ceiling or floor effects while shoulder NPS had 26 patients (13.3%) at either the floor or the ceiling. PROMIS PI demonstrated a strong correlation with PROMIS Physical Function (rs = -0.65; p < 0.001), ASES total score (rs = -0.67; p < 0.001), and PROMIS Fatigue (rs = 0.64; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The strong association noted between PROMIS PI and psychosocial and behavioral factors, versus that of NPS, demonstrates that PROMIS Pain Interference may be a more appropriate choice as an outcome measure where the surgeon is concerned about a patient's improvement of functioning and decrease in the impact of pain in other aspects of wellbeing following shoulder surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.