Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Clinical significance, as opposed to statistical significance, has increasingly been utilized to evaluate outcomes after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The purpose of this study was to identify thresholds of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for TSA outcome metrics and determine if these thresholds are influenced by prosthesis type (anatomic or reverse TSA), sex, or preoperative diagnosis. METHODS:A prospectively collected international multicenter database inclusive of 38 surgeons was queried for patients receiving a primary aTSA or rTSA between 2003 and 2021. Prospectively, outcome metrics including ASES, shoulder function score (SFS), SST, UCLA, Constant, VAS Pain, shoulder arthroplasty smart (SAS) score, forward flexion, abduction, external rotation, and internal rotation was recorded preoperatively and at each follow-up. A patient satisfaction question was administered at each follow-up. Anchor-based MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated as defined previously overall and according to implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex. The percentage of patients achieving thresholds was also quantified. RESULTS:A total of 5851 total shoulder arthroplasties (TSAs) including aTSA (n = 2236) and rTSA (n = 3615) were included in the study cohort. The following were identified as MCID thresholds for the overall (aTSA + rTSA irrespective of diagnosis or sex) cohort: VAS Pain (-1.5), SFS (1.2), SST (2.1), Constant (7.2), ASES (13.9), UCLA (8.2), SPADI (-21.5), and SAS (7.3), Abduction (13°), Forward elevation (16°), External rotation (4°), Internal rotation score (0.2). SCB thresholds for the overall cohort were: VAS Pain (-3.3), SFS (2.9), SST 3.8), Constant (18.9), ASES (33.1), UCLA (12.3), SPADI (-44.7), and SAS (18.2), Abduction (30°), Forward elevation (31°), External rotation (12°), Internal rotation score (0.9). PASS thresholds for the overall cohort were: VAS Pain (0.8), SFS (7.3), SST (9.2), Constant (64.2), ASES (79.5), UCLA (29.5), SPADI (24.7), and SAS (72.5), Abduction (104°), Forward elevation (130°), External rotation (30°), Internal rotation score (3.2). MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds varied depending on preoperative diagnosis and sex. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds vary depending on implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex. A comprehensive understanding of these differences as well as identification of clinically relevant thresholds for legacy and novel metrics is essential to assist surgeons in evaluating their patient's outcomes, interpreting the literature, and counseling their patients preoperatively regarding expectations for improvement. Given that PASS thresholds are fragile and vary greatly depending on cohort variability, caution should be exercised in conflating them across different studies.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:The aim of this study is to facilitate preoperative identification of patients at-risk for dislocation after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) using the Equinoxe rTSA prosthesis (medialized glenoid, lateralized onlay humerus with a 145° neck angle) and quantify the impact of accumulating risk factors on the occurrence of dislocation. METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed 10,023 primary rTSA patients from an international multi-center database of a single platform shoulder prosthesis and quantified the dislocation rate associated with multiple combinations of previously identified risk factors. To adapt our statistical results for prospective identification of patients most at-risk for dislocation, we stratified our dataset by multiple risk factor combinations and calculated the odds ratio for each cohort to quantify the impact of accumulating risk factors on dislocation. RESULTS:136 (52F/83M/1UNK) of 10,023 primary rTSA patients were reported to have a dislocation for a rate of 1.4%. Patients with zero risk factors were rare, where only 12.7% of patients (1,268 of 10,023) had no risk factors, and only 0.5% of these (6 of 1,268) had a report of dislocation. The dislocation rate increased in patient cohorts with an increasing number of risk factors. Specifically, the dislocation rate increased from 0.9% for a patient cohort with 1 risk factor to 1.0% for 2 risk factors, 1.6% for 3 risk factors, 2.7% for 4 risk factors, 5.3% for 5 risk factors, and 7.3% for 6 risk factors. Stratifying dislocation rate by multiple risk factor combinations identified numerous cohorts with either an elevated risk or a diminished risk for dislocation. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:This 10,023 rTSA multi-center study demonstrated that 1.4% of rTSA patients experienced dislocation with one specific medialized glenoid/lateralized humerus onlay rTSA prosthesis. Stratifying patients by multiple combinations of risk factors demonstrated the impact of accumulating risk factors on incidence of dislocation. rTSA patients with the greatest risk of dislocation were: male gender, age ≤67 years at the time of surgery, patients with BMI ≥31, patients who received cemented humeral stems, patients who received glenospheres having a diameter >40mm, and/or patients who received expanded/laterally offset glenospheres. Patients with these risk factors who are considering rTSA using a medial glenoid/lateral humerus, should be made aware of their elevated dislocation risk profile.

OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to perform a network meta-analysis of level I and II evidence comparing different management techniques to define the optimum treatment method for humeral shaft fractures (HSFs). DATA SOURCES/METHODS:A systematic review of the literature using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library was screened from 2010 to 2023. STUDY SELECTION/METHODS:Inclusion criteria were evidence level I or II studies comparing nonoperative and/or operative repair techniques including open reduction internal fixation plate osteosynthesis (ORIF-Plate), minimally invasive percutaneous plating (MIPO), and intramedullary nail (IMN) fixation for the management of HSFs (OTA/AO 12A, B, C). DATA EXTRACTION/METHODS:The risk of bias and methodologic quality of evidence were assessed according to the guidelines designed by the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group and Cochrane Methods Bias Group. DATA SYNTHESIS/RESULTS:Network meta-analysis was conducted with a frequentist approach with a random-effects model using the netmeta package version 0.9-6 in R. RESULTS:A total of 25 studies (1908 patients) were included. MIPO resulted in the lowest complication rate (2.1%) when compared with ORIF-Plate (16.1%) [odds ratio (OR), 0.13; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.04-0.49]. MIPO resulted in the lowest nonunion rate (0.65%) compared with all management techniques (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08-0.98), whereas Non-Op resulted in the highest (15.87%) (OR, 3.48; 95% CI, 1.98-6.11). MIPO demonstrated the lowest rate of postoperative radial nerve palsy overall (2.2%) and demonstrated a significantly lower rate compared with ORIF-Plate (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.07-0.71, P = 0.02). IMN resulted in the lowest rate of deep infection (1.1%) when compared with ORIF-Plate (8.6%; P = 0.013). MIPO resulted in a significantly lower Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score (3.86 ± 5.2) and higher American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (98.2 ± 1.4) than ORIF-Plate (19.5 ± 9.0 and 60.0 ± 5.4, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The results from this study support that surgical management results in better postoperative functional outcomes, leads to higher union rates, reduces fracture healing time, reduces revision rate, and decreases malunion rates in patients with HSFs. In addition, MIPO resulted in statistically higher union rates, lowest complication rate, lowest rate of postoperative radial nerve palsy, and lower intraoperative time while resulting in better postoperative Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores when compared with nonoperative and operative (ORIF and IMN) treatment modalities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Glenoid component positioning is an important and challenging aspect of total shoulder arthroplasty. The use of freehand technique with standard instrumentation or preoperative planning based on 2-dimensional computed tomography (CT) scans provides an opportunity for improvement in terms of component accuracy, precision, and deformity correction. These techniques have produced varying outcomes. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Preoperative planning software (PPS), patient specific instrumentation (PSI), and intraoperative navigation (NAV) have been developed to improve the accuracy of implant placement and deformity correction with the ultimate goals of improved patient outcomes and implant longevity. Literature search was conducted on published and available studies comparing the accuracy of glenoid component placement and improvements in surgical and patient outcomes amongst the aforementioned techniques. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:PPS, PSI, and NAV have demonstrated improved accuracy over freehand techniques with standard instrumentation. However, data demonstrating the clinical benefit and cost effectiveness of these new technologies are lacking. DISCUSSION/UNASSIGNED:In this paper, we reviewed the evidence available to answer the question of whether or not advanced shoulder arthroplasty technologies have been beneficial and reviewed future technologies in development such as virtual/mixed-reality and robotic assisted shoulder surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/UNASSIGNED:4.

Background: The purpose of this study is to retrospectively analyze all primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) patients within a multicenter international database of a single prosthesis to identify risk factors for patients with rotator cuff tear (RCT) and aseptic glenoid loosening. Methods: To investigate the risk factors for RCT and aseptic glenoid loosening, we retrospectively analyzed all aTSA patients with 2-year minimum follow-up from a multicenter international database of a single platform shoulder system, only excluding patients with a history of revision arthroplasty, infections, and humeral fractures. A univariate/multivariate analysis was conducted to compare primary aTSA patients who had report of: 1) a RCT and/or subscapularis failure and 2) aseptic glenoid loosening/cage glenoid dissociations, to identify the differences in (i) intrinsic patient demographics and comorbidities and (ii) implant and operative parameters. Finally, to adapt our statistical analysis for prospective identification of patients most at-risk for RCT and aseptic glenoid loosening, we stratified the dataset by multiple risk factor combinations and calculated the odds ratio (OR) to determine the impact of accumulating risk factors on the incidence rate of each complication. Results: 122 aTSA shoulders had a RCT for a rate of 3.2% and 123 aTSA shoulders had aseptic glenoid loosening for a rate of 3.3%. The multivariate analysis identified that aTSA patients with RCT were more likely to have previous shoulder surgery (P < .001) and small size glenoids (P = .002). Additionally, the multivariate analysis identified that aTSA patients with aseptic glenoid loosening were more likely to be younger (≤62 years at the time of surgery, P = .001), have small size glenoids (P = .033) and have a nonhybrid glenoids (P < .001). Stratifying patients with multiple risk factors identified multiple aTSA cohorts with ORs >2 for RCT or aseptic glenoid loosening. Discussion: This analysis of 2699 primary aTSA identified risk factors for the two most common postoperative complications: RCTs and aseptic glenoid loosening. Using these risk factors, we calculated ORs for patient cohorts with multiple risk factors to identify the patients with the greatest risk for each complication. This information is useful to guide the surgeon in their preoperative counseling and potentially mitigate the occurrence of these complications, by indicating patients with these risk-factors for alternative treatment strategies, like rTSA, instead of aTSA.

Orthopedic surgery in the United States has gone through many changes over the past few centuries. Starting with a small sect of subspecialized surgeons, advances in technology and surgical skills have paralleled the growth of the specialty. To keep up with demand, the training of orthopedic surgeons has undergone many iterations. From apprenticeships to the current residency model, the field has always adapted to ensure the constant production of well-trained surgeons to take care of the growing orthopedic needs in the population. In order to guarantee this, many regulatory committees have been formed over the years to help guide the regulation and certification of orthopedic training programs. With current day residents facing new challenges, the specialty continues to adapt the way it trains its future.

The nutritional status of patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery has started to garner increasing attention in published literature. Notable previous evidence has demonstrated the negative effect of malnutrition on outcomes after orthopaedic procedures. Although there has been increased recognition of malnutrition as a risk factor for suboptimal outcomes, the use of nutritional supplementation to mitigate those risks is not well understood. The purpose of this review of most current literature on the topic is to introduce and elucidate the role of amino acid supplementation as a countermeasure to muscle loss and improvement of nutritional status in orthopaedic patients to improve results and outcomes after orthopaedic surgery.

➤ Aging is associated with well-documented neurocognitive and psychomotor changes.➤ These changes can be expected to impact the skill with which orthopaedic surgeons continue to perform surgical procedures.➤ Currently, there is no standardized approach for assessing the changes in surgical skills and clinical judgment that may occur with aging.➤ Oversight by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the impact of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, and the current legal climate make it difficult to institute a mandatory assessment program.➤ The regularly scheduled credentialing process that occurs at each institution can be the most effective time to assess for these changes because it utilizes an established process that occurs at regularly scheduled intervals.➤ Each department of orthopaedic surgery and institution should determine an approach that can be utilized when there is concern that a surgeon's surgical skills have shown signs of deterioration.