Image intensifier distortion influences a surgeon's ability to aim guidewires during orthopaedic procedures.

OBJECTIVE: Accurate insertion of a guidewire under image intensifier guidance is a fundamental skill required by orthopaedic surgeons. This study investigated how image intensifier distortion, which is composed of pin-cushion and sigmoidal components, changed the apparent trajectory of a guidewire, and the resulting deviation between the intended and actual guidewire tip position. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intraoperative image intensifier images for 220 consecutive patients with hip fractures were retrospectively corrected for distortion using a global polynomial method. The deviation between the intended and actual guidewire tip positions was calculated. Additional distortion parameters were tested using an image intensifier produced by a different manufacturer, and a flat-panel c-arm. RESULTS: Deviation was approximately 1 cm if the guidewire was aimed from the extremity of the image and almost 0 if the entry point was only 20% from the centre (p < 0.001). The direction of deviation was different for left and right hips, with average deviations measuring 3 mm proximal and 5 mm distal respectively (p < 0.001). The flat-panel c-arm almost completely eliminated distortion. CONCLUSIONS: Image intensifier distortion significantly altered the intended trajectory of a guidewire, with guidewires aimed from the image periphery more affected than guidewires aimed from the centre. Furthermore, for right hips, guidewires should be aimed distal to their intended position, and for left hips they should be aimed proximal to achieve their desired position. The flat-panel c-arm eliminated the effect of distortion; hence, it may be preferable if precision in guidewire positioning is vital.

Trauma versus no trauma: an analysis of the effect of tear mechanism on tendon healing in 1300 consecutive patients after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

BACKGROUND: Patients with rotator cuff tears often recall a specific initiating event (traumatic), whereas many cannot (nontraumatic). It is unclear how important a history of trauma is to the outcomes of rotator cuff repair. METHODS: This question was addressed in a study cohort of 1300 consecutive patients who completed a preoperative questionnaire regarding their shoulder injury and had a systematic evaluation of shoulder range of motion and strength, a primary arthroscopic rotator cuff repair performed by a single surgeon, an ultrasound scan, and the same subjective and objective measurements made of their shoulder 6 months after surgery. Post hoc, this cohort was separated into 2 groups: those who reported no history of trauma on presentation (n = 489) and those with a history of traumatic injury (n = 811). RESULTS: The retear rate in the group with no history of trauma was 12%, whereas that of the group with a history of trauma was 14% (P = .36). Those patients with a history of shoulder trauma who waited longer than 24 months had higher retear rates (20%) than those who had their surgery earlier (13%) (P = .040). CONCLUSION: Recollection of a traumatic initiating event had little effect on the outcome of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Duration of symptoms was important in predicting retears if patients recalled a specific initiating event but not in patients who did not recall any specific initiating event. Patients with a history of trauma should be encouraged to have their rotator cuff tear repaired within 2 years.

Factors predicting rotator cuff retears: an analysis of 1000 consecutive rotator cuff repairs.

BACKGROUND: The rate of retears after rotator cuff repair varies from 11% to 94%. A retear is associated with poorer subjective and objective clinical outcomes than intact repair. PURPOSE: This study was designed to determine which preoperative and/or intraoperative factors held the greatest association with retears after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: This study retrospectively evaluated 1000 consecutive patients who had undergone a primary rotator cuff repair by a single surgeon using an arthroscopic inverted-mattress knotless technique and who had undergone an ultrasound evaluation 6 months after surgery to assess repair integrity. Exclusion criteria included previous rotator cuff repair on the same shoulder, incomplete repair, and repair using a synthetic polytetrafluoroethylene patch. All patients had completed the modified L'Insalata Questionnaire and underwent a clinical examination before surgery. Measurements of tear size, tear thickness, associated shoulder injury, tissue quality, and tendon mobility were recorded intraoperatively. RESULTS: The overall retear rate at 6 months after surgery was 17%. Retears occurred in 27% of full-thickness tears and 5% of partial-thickness tears (P < .0001). The best independent predictors of retears were anteroposterior tear length (correlation coefficient r = 0.41, P < .0001), tear size area (r = 0.40, P < .0001), mediolateral tear length (r = 0.34, P < .0001), tear thickness (r = 0.29, P < .0001), age at surgery (r = 0.27, P < .0001), and operative time (r = 0.18, P < .0001). These factors produced a predictive model for retears: logit P = (0.039 × age at surgery in years) + (0.027 × tear thickness in %) + (1 × anteroposterior tear length in cm) + (0.76 × mediolateral tear length in cm) - (0.17 × tear size area in cm(2)) + (0.018 × operative time in minutes) -9.7. Logit P can be transformed into P, which is the chance of retears at 6 months after surgery. CONCLUSION: A rotator cuff retear is a multifactorial process with no single preoperative or intraoperative factor being overwhelmingly predictive of it. Nevertheless, rotator cuff tear size (tear dimensions, tear size area, and tear thickness) showed stronger associations with retears at 6 months after surgery than did measures of tissue quality and concomitant shoulder injuries.