Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To assess whether an Artificial Intelligence (AI) translation of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) report improved patient understanding of the information presented in the radiology report and to evaluate patient preferences for these translations over traditional radiology reports. METHODS:Patients presenting to an orthopedic surgery clinic were prospectively enrolled and randomized into two groups. The "standard MRI group" received a traditional MRI report written by a radiologist of a multi-ligament knee injury, while the "AI group" received an AI- translated version of the same report, generated using ChatGPT 4. All patients completed a standardized quiz to assess comprehension of their respective reports. Following the quiz, participants were provided with both reports and asked to rate their preferences between the two. Demographic information including age, sex, race, education level, area deprivation index, and previous orthopedic history was collected from all patients. RESULTS:A total of 64 patients (32 in each group) with an average age of 51.9 ± 15.5 years were enrolled and randomized. No significant differences in demographics were identified between the two groups. Patients in the AI group scored 20% higher than those in the standard MRI group on the comprehension quiz (74.7% vs 54.7%, p<.001). 87.5% of patients preferred the AI translation while 4.7% preferred the standard version. Patients rated the AI translation as significantly clearer than the standard (4.5/5 vs. 2.2/5, p<.001), although they had less trust in the AI translation compared to the standard report (4.1/5 vs 4.5/5, p=.003). A higher education level was predictive of comprehension. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:AI-translated MRI reports significantly improved patient comprehension and were preferred for their clarity, despite lower trust levels compared to standard radiology reports. CLINICAL RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:AI-translated MRI reports have the potential to enhance patient understanding of radiologic findings in orthopedic care. However, given the low quality and low level of trust in AI-generated content observed in this study, physician oversight remains essential to ensure accuracy and sustain patient confidence.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:There is limited comparative evidence on patient outcomes following cartilage repair in various knee compartments. The aim of this study was to compare clinical and imaging outcomes after treating cartilage defects in femoral condyles and trochlea with either an aragonite-based scaffold or surgical standard of care (SSoC, i.e., debridement/microfractures) in a large multicentre randomized controlled trial. METHODS:247 patients with up to three knee joint surface lesions (ICRS grade IIIa or above) in the femoral condyles, trochlea or both ("mixed"), were enrolled and randomized to surgery with either a cell-free aragonite scaffold or SSoC. Patients were followed for up to 48 months by analysing subjective scores (KOOS and IKDC), radiological outcomes (defect filling on MRI), as well as treatment failure rates and adverse events. A differential analysis of outcomes for condylar, trochlear and mixed lesions was performed. RESULTS:The scaffold group significantly outperformed the SSoC group regardless of lesion location with statistically significantly better KOOS Overall scores at 24 months (all p ≤ 0.0009) and 48 months (all p ≤ 0.02). Similar results were observed for KOOS subscales and IKDC scores. For KOOS responder rates, superiority of the implant group was demonstrated at 24, 36, and 48 months (all p ≤ 0.004). Higher defect filling on MRI for implants was observed for all locations. Lower treatment failure rates for the implant were observed in condylar and mixed lesions. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The aragonite-based scaffold was safe and effective regardless of the defect location, providing superior clinical and radiological outcomes compared to SSoC up to four years follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:I - Randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To evaluate long-term outcomes of patients treated with posterior medial meniscal root tear (PMMRT) repair through assessment of functional outcome scores and to identify patient surgical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) characteristics associated with improved outcomes. METHODS:This was a single-centre, retrospective study evaluating patients who had undergone a PMMR repair using a transtibial suture pullout technique with two locking cinch sutures. This was performed as a follow-up to previously published 2-year and 5-year outcome studies, using the same cohort. All patients from the prior short-term and midterm studies were invited to participate. Patient-reported outcome (PROs) scores, including the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm scores, were collected. Previously collected demographic data were updated based on review of the electronic medical record. Patient outcomes were assessed preoperatively, as well as at 2-year, 5-year and 8-year postoperatively. MRI outcome measurements were assessed at 2-year and 5-year follow-ups. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 26. RESULTS:Seventeen patients of the original 18 patients (94.4%) were included in the final analysis. Additionally, three patients who had additional ipsilateral surgery were excluded from the analysis of PROs. The IKDC score significantly increased from 44.7 ± 11.6 at preoperative baseline to 71.2 ± 21.3 at 8-year post-operation (p = 0.001). There were no significant differences in IKDC score between 2-year and 8-year follow-ups (p = n.s.) or 5-year and 8-year follow-ups (p = n.s.). The Lysholm score significantly increased from 49.6 ± 7.3 at preoperative baseline to 76.4 ± 17.2 at 8-year follow-up (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in Lysholm scores between 2-year and 8-year follow-ups (p = n.s.) or 5-year and 8-year follow-ups (p = n.s.). A linear regression analysis found that 5-year IKDC scores were significantly correlated with 8-year IKDC scores (β = 0.681, p = 0.038). At 8-year follow-up, four (23.5%) patients required additional procedures on their operative knee (one total knee arthroplasty conversion). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients treated with repair of PMMRT had maintenance of clinical outcome improvements at long-term follow-up despite worsening MRI outcomes at short-term and medium-term follow-ups. While a high proportion of patients required additional procedures on their operative knee at 8-year follow-up, few of these patient's additional procedures were related to failure of their primary surgery. Providers and patients may expect durable clinical outcomes following the repair of PMMRT, irrespective of radiographic appearance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level IV.

The Latarjet procedure is a frequently used stabilization procedure in case of anterior shoulder instability with critical glenoid bone loss and/or off-track Hill Sachs lesions. Although uncommon, intra-operative graft fractures do occur. When confronted with this potentially challenging intra-operative complication, having a secondary solution is paramount to achieve a successful outcome. This technical note provides a treatment algorithm that may function as a useful guideline to assist surgeons that experience this potentially complex unintended event during a Latarjet procedure. Level of evidence: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to compare the short-term clinical outcomes of matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI) to those seen following traditional autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) in the management of symptomatic cartilage lesions of the knee. METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent either ACI or MACI from January 2011 to March 2018. Patients with a minimum postoperative follow-up of 18 months were contacted. Demographic information, intraoperative findings, and patient-reported functional outcomes scores were collected. Comparisons were made between the two cell-based cartilage repair techniques. RESULTS:Fifty-six patients were included in the study (39 ACI, 17 MACI). Visual analog scale (VAS) for pain scores improved significantly in both groups, with MACI patients demonstrating significantly lower postoperative pain scores compared to those treated with ACI. In the ACI group, there was a decrease in the Tegner Activity score compared to the preoperative baseline, while no significant difference was seen between pre- and postoperative activity levels in the MACI group. Patients were generally satisfied with the outcome of their procedures, and there was no significant difference in satisfaction between groups. No patients re-quired additional surgery during the follow-up period. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Both ACI and MACI demonstrated good short-term postoperative clinical results with improved pain and activity levels compared to the preoperative baseline. Patients treated with the MACI technique demonstrated greater reductions in pain scores compared to ACI, and while ACI resulted in a decrease in levels of postoperative activity, activity levels for MACI remained stable.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To compare clinical outcomes and the rate of return to sport among patients that have undergone minimally invasive repair versus open approach of an acute Achilles tendon rupture. METHODS:Patients who underwent surgical repair of acute Achilles tendon rupture at a single urban academic institution from 2017 to 2020 with minimum 2-year follow-up were reviewed retrospectively. Preinjury sport participation and preinjury work activity information, the Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS), the Tegner Activity Scale, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System for mobility and pain interference were collected. RESULTS:In total, 144 patients were initially included in the study. Of these, 63 patients were followed with a mean follow-up of 45.3 ± 29.2 months. The mean operative time did not significantly differ between groups (p = 0.938). Patients who underwent minimally invasive repair returned to sport at a rate of 88.9% at a mean of 10.6 ± 5.8 months, compared to return rate of open procedures of 83.7% at 9.5 ± 5.5 months. There were no significant differences in ATRS (p = 0.246), Tegner (p = 0.137) or VAS pain (p = 0.317) scores between groups. There was no difference in cosmetic satisfaction between PARS and open repair groups (88.4 vs. 76.0; p = 0.244). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients who underwent minimally invasive repair of acute Achilles tendon ruptures demonstrate no significant differences with respect to cosmesis, operative time, patient-reported outcomes and the rate and level of return to activities when compared to an open approach. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III.

The gold standard for surgical treatment of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries is reconstruction. There are a variety of graft options, from autograft to allograft, using bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB), hamstrings, quadriceps, or Achilles, and, in the case of a multiligamentous knee injury (MLKI), allograft may be preferred to decrease operative time and graft harvest morbidity. The BioBrace (ConMed, New Haven, CT) is a bioinductive collagen scaffold designed to provide an environment for soft tissue remodeling with time zero biomechanical support and can be used to augment graft reconstructions in the case of concerns for allograft strength, healing, or width. The purpose of this Technical Note is to describe the technique for performing an ACL reconstruction with BioBrace-augmented allograft in the setting of a MLKI, with special consideration for 2 methods of graft preparation (BTB and soft tissue).

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mid-term results of posterior medial meniscal root tear (PMMRT) repair through assessment of functional outcome scores and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS:This was a single-center, retrospective study evaluating patients that had undergone a PMMRT. This was a follow-up to a previously published 2-year outcome study (all original patients were invited to participate). Clinical outcomes included pre- and postoperative International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm scores. Root healing, meniscal extrusion, and cartilage degeneration via International Cartilage Repair Society Scale (ICRS) grades were assessed on MRI by two musculoskeletal fellowship-trained radiologists. RESULTS:10 of the original study's 18 patients were able to participate. Mean age and BMI was 48.4 ± 12.0 years and 29.5 ± 4.5, respectively, with mean follow-up 65.5 ± 8.3 months (range 52.0-75.8) (60% female). The IKDC significantly increased from 43 ± 13 preoperatively to 75 ± 16 at 5-year follow-up (p < 0.001). There was no significant change in IKDC score between 2-year and 5-year follow-up [75 ± 16 vs 73 ± 20, (n.s)]. The Lysholm also significantly increased between preoperative and 5-year follow-up (49 ± 7 vs 84 ± 11, p < 0.001). There was no significant change between Lysholm score at 2-year and 5-year follow-up [84.0 ± 11 vs 82 ± 13, (n.s)]. Mean extrusion did not significantly change from the preoperative state to 5-year follow-up [4.80 mm ± 1.9 vs 5.0 mm ± 2.5, (n.s.)]. Extrusion also did not significantly change between 2-and 5-year follow-up [6.1 ± 3.2 mm vs 5.0 mm ± 2.5, (n.s.)]. No patients with > 3 mm of extrusion on preoperative MRI had < 3 mm of extrusion on postoperative MRI. Both medial femoral condyle and medial tibial plateau ICRS grades significantly increased from preoperative to 2-year follow-up (p = 0.038, p = 0.023, respectively). Medial femoral condyle and medial tibial plateau ICRS grades again significantly increased between 2-year and 5-year follow-up (p = 0.014, p = 0.034). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients treated with the transtibial suture pullout technique with two locking cinch sutures had maintenance of clinical outcome improvements at 5-year follow-up. However, extrusion was widely prevalent, with worsening progression of femoral and tibial chondral disease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level 4.

Purpose/UNASSIGNED:To evaluate the outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage (ABRR) compared with the arthroscopic Latarjet (AL) procedure for anterior shoulder instability in patients with a labral tear and a concomitant engaging Hill-Sachs lesion. Methods/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective review of patients who underwent either ABRR or the AL procedure for a diagnosis of anterior shoulder instability with a concomitant engaging Hill-Sachs lesion between 2011 and 2019 was performed. Recurrent instability, the visual analog scale score, the Subjective Shoulder Value, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability score, patient satisfaction, willingness to undergo surgery again, and return to work or sport were evaluated. Results/UNASSIGNED: = .39). Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:In patients with anterior shoulder instability and a concomitant Hill-Sachs lesion, both ABRR and the AL procedure were shown to be reliable treatments, with a low rate of recurrent instability and excellent patient-reported outcomes in appropriately selected patients. However, our study could not determine whether there was critical glenoid bone loss in patients undergoing ABRR, and surgeons should still exercise caution in performing ABRR in patients with high-grade glenoid bone loss or in those with failed prior stabilizations. Level of Evidence/UNASSIGNED:Level III, retrospective cohort study.

IMPORTANCE/OBJECTIVE:There have been several recent systematic reviews of quadriceps tendon autografts (QT), which have not shown any significant difference in outcomes between QT and hamstring tendon autograft (HS) for ACL reconstruction (ACLR). However, several recent comparative studies have been published comparing QT to HS for ACLR. AIM/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the studies comparing QT to HS for ACLR. EVIDENCE REVIEW/METHODS:Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on the PRISMA guidelines, with a senior author arbitrating discrepancies. Cohort studies comparing QT with HS were included. FINDINGS/RESULTS:There were 15 studies comparing 611 patients with QT to 543 patients with HS, with a mean of 27.4 months follow-up. QT resulted in a significantly lower rate of graft re-rupture (2.5% vs 8.7%, p = 0.01), and donor site morbidity (17.6% vs 26.2%, p = 0.02). There was a significant difference in favour of QT for the positive pivot shift test (Grade I/II: 15.8% vs 23.0%, p = 0.02), but not in the rate of the positive Lachman test (Grade I/II: 18.3% vs 26.7%, p = 0.16). Additionally, there was no difference in the side to side difference in knee stability (1.8 mm vs 2.0 mm, p = 0.48). Functionally, both grafts had similar functional outcomes in terms of the IKDC score (88.0 vs 87.9, p = 0.69), and Lysholm score (89.3 vs 87.6, p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE/CONCLUSIONS:Our study showed that QT has a lower re-rupture rate than HS in ACLR, with lower donor site morbidity. QT appeared to be slightly better for residual pivot shift, but there was no difference in patient-reported outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:III.