Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation Correlates with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score for Common Elbow Pathology: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There are currently a variety of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for elbow pathology, without any established gold standard. The Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) is a single question assessment of the patient's perceived overall function compared with normal. The SANE score has been correlated with PROs from the shoulder and knee literature. PURPOSE: To correlate the SANE score for a variety of elbow pathologies with a traditionally reported elbow outcome measure, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons-Elbow score (ASES-E). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of all patients identified at a single center between April 2016 and January 2019 who presented as a new patient with elbow pathology. All patients prospectively completed the ASES-E along with the SANE score for elbow (SANE-E) at the time of initial consultation. Spearman correlations (r) were performed to evaluate the correlation between the ASES-E and the SANE-E score for specific elbow pathology, along with descriptive data such as age, sex, and chronicity of the problem. RESULTS: A total of 555 patients (166 women, 29.9%) with a mean ± SD age of 51.0 ± 11.7 years with the diagnoses of medial epicondylitis (n = 72; 13.0%), lateral epicondylitis (n = 224; 40.4%), biceps tendon rupture (n = 139; 25.0%), triceps tendon rupture (n = 21; 3.8%), and elbow arthritis (n = 99; 17.8%) were included in this analysis. There was moderate correlation between the SANE-E and the ASES-E (r = 0.623; P < .001), with strongest correlation with the visual analog scale (VAS) (r = -0.518; P < .001) compared with any individual question and moderate to strong correlations based on specific diagnoses. SANE-E and ASES-E scores for the entire cohort were 42.9 ± 26.7 and 56.9 ± 21.4, respectively (P < .001). Age (r = 0.027; P = .526), sex (r = 0.026; P = .555), VAS (r = -0.106; P = .013), and chronicity of the problem (r = -0.037; P = .384) were not found to be correlated with differences in ASES-E and SANE-E. CONCLUSION: The SANE-E score is a simple way to assess patient-perceived function relative to normal. The findings of this study demonstrated moderate to strong correlation between the ASES-E and the SANE-E score for a variety of commonly encountered elbow conditions.

Characterizing opioid consumption in the 30-day post-operative period following shoulder surgery: are we over prescribing?

Objectives: The primary aim of this study was to characterize opioid consumption in the first 30 days after shoulder surgery. Secondary aims were to assess patient expectations, pain tolerance, risk factors for increase opioid consumption, and proper disposal of narcotics.Methods: Patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (RCR), anatomic shoulder arthroplasty, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), distal clavicle resection, or labral surgery were prospectively enrolled. Collected data included demographics, Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), pain tolerance surveys, narcotic use, adverse effects, and disposal method.Results: Eighty patients were included in this study. At 28 days, RCR patients took significantly more 5 mg oxycodone-equivalent pills than RSA patients (18.4 vs. 7.5; p = 0.001). Number of days on narcotics did not differ between groups. By day 14, 73 (92.5%) patients had stopped taking narcotics entirely, with 872 5 mg oxycodone-equivalent pills prescribed in surplus. Ten (14.3%) patients required an additional prescription. There was a significant difference in tobacco use (20% vs. 1.4%; p = 0.04), psychiatric history (50% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.0004) and PCS (12.7 vs. 7.1; p = 0.027) in these patients, with PCS of 12.5 as predictive of requiring another prescription.Conclusion: All patients achieved adequate pain control, with 60 (75%) patients having excess pills. Opioid utilization differed based on surgery - significantly lower use in RSA patients compared to RCR. Only 13 (16.25%) patients required more than 20 5 mg oxycodone-equivalent pills. Tobacco use, history of psychiatric illness, and PCS were risk factors for requiring more prescriptions.

Tantalum: the next biomaterial in spine surgery?

Tantalum is a porous metal, whose elastic modulus, high frictional properties and biocompatibility make it an ideal construct to facilitate adequate bony fusion in spine surgery. Since 2015, the published literature on clinical outcomes of tantalum in spine surgery has more than doubled. A review of the literature was performed on the PubMed (MEDLINE) database on January 27, 2019, for papers pertinent to the use of tantalum metal in spine surgery. Thirteen studies were included in this review. For cervical spine, we found increased fusion rates in autograft alone compared to tantalum standalone (92.8% vs. 89.0%, P=0.001) and tantalum cages plus autograft (92.8% vs. 64.8%, P<0.0001). Complication rates in cervical fusion were lower in patients treated with tantalum standalone versus those treated with autograft (7.4% vs. 13.7%, P<0.0001), and autograft and anterior plate (7.4% vs. 33%, P=0.001). Autograft patients had higher rates of revision surgery compared to tantalum standalone (12.8% vs. 2.8%, P<0.0001) and tantalum ring with autograft (12.8% vs. 7.7%, P<0.001). For lumbar spine, we found autograft had lower fusion rate compared to tantalum standalone (80.0% vs. 93.4%, P<0.0001). Use of tantalum metal in spine fusion surgery shows promising results in fusion, complication and revision rates, and clinical outcomes compared to autograft. Although, fusion rates in short-term studies evaluating tantalum in the cervical spine are conflicting, long-term series beyond 2 years show excellent results. This early finding may be related difficulties in radiographic evaluation of fusion in the setting of tantalum cage use. Further studies are needed to further delineate the timing of fusion with the implementation of tantalum in the cervical and lumbar spine.

Evaluating Treatment Strategies for Spinal Lesions in Multiple Myeloma: A Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Vertebral disease is a major cause of morbidity in 70% of patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma (MM). Associated osteolytic lesions and vertebral fractures are well documented in causing debilitating pain, functional restrictions, spinal deformity, and cord compression. Currently, treatment modalities for refractory MM spinal pain include systemic therapy, radiotherapy, cementoplasty (vertebroplasty/kyphoplasty), and radio frequency ablation. Our objectives were to report on the efficacy of existing treatments for MM patients with refractory spinal pain, to determine if a standardized treatment algorithm has been described, and to set the foundation upon which future prospective studies can be designed. METHODS: A systematic search of the PubMed database was performed for studies relevant to the treatment of vertebral disease in MM patients. A multitude of search terms in various combinations were used, including but not limited to: "vertebroplasty," "kyphoplasty," "radiation," "multiple myeloma," "radiotherapy," and "radiosurgery." RESULTS: Our preliminary search resulted in 219 articles, which subsequently resulted in 19 papers following abstract, title, full-text, and bibliography review. These papers were then grouped by treatment modality: radiotherapy, cementoplasty, or combination therapy. Significant pain and functional score improvement across all treatment modalities was found in the majority of the literature. While complications of treatment occurred, few were noted to be clinically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment options-radiotherapy and/or cementoplasty-for vertebral lesions and pathologic fractures in MM patients demonstrate significant radiographic and clinical improvement. However, there is no consensus in the literature as to the optimal treatment modality as a result of a limited number of studies reporting head-to-head comparisons. One study did find significantly improved pain and functional scores with preserved vertebral height in favor of kyphoplasty over radiotherapy. When not contraindicated, we advocate for some form of cementoplasty. Further prospective studies are required before implementation of a standardized treatment protocol. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.