Searched for: in-biosketch:true
person:virkm01
Anesthesia in Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Boin, Michael A; Mehta, Devan; Dankert, John; Umeh, Uchenna O; Zuckerman, Joseph D; Virk, Mandeep S
»:For shoulder arthroplasty, regional anesthesia is safer when compared with general anesthesia. There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate the superiority of regional anesthesia with respect to pulmonary complications and hospital length of stay. »:Infiltration of the shoulder with local anesthetics offers no additional benefits compared with single-shot or continuous brachial plexus blocks for shoulder arthroplasty. »:There is high-quality evidence (Level I) demonstrating lower pain scores and lower perioperative opioid requirements after a continuous peripheral nerve block compared with a single-shot nerve block. However, catheter dislodgment and logistical issues with catheter insertion are impediments to the widespread usage of a continuous nerve block with an indwelling catheter. »:Liposomal bupivacaine is comparable with non-liposomal local anesthetic agents with respect to pain relief, the opioid-sparing effect, and adverse effects in the first 48 hours after total shoulder arthroplasty. »:Perioperative dexamethasone administration improves postoperative pain control, decreases perioperative opioid requirements, and reduces postoperative nausea.
PMID: 34757963
ISSN: 2329-9185
CID: 5050572
Minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptom state of PROMIS upper extremity after total shoulder arthroplasty
Gordon, Dan; Pines, Yaniv; Ben-Ari, Erel; As, Rokito; Kwon, Young W; Zuckerman, Joseph D; Virk, Mandeep S
Background/UNASSIGNED:The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System minimal clinically important difference (PROMIS MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) of patient-reported outcome measures provide clinical significance to patient-reported outcome measures scores. The goal of this study is to measure the MCID, SCB, and PASS of PROMIS Upper Extremity v2.0 (PROMIS UE) in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Methods/UNASSIGNED:All patients who underwent TSA since October 2017 were identified from our institutional database. Patients who had completed the PROMIS UE outcome measure before surgery were asked to complete a PROMIS UE and anchor survey that contained two transition questions to assess patient satisfaction and change in symptoms since treatment. The anchor-based MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated as the change in PROMIS UE score that represented the optimal cutoff for a receiver operating characteristic curve. The distribution-based MCID was calculated as a range between the average standard error of measurement multiplied by 2 different constants: 1 and 2.77. Results/UNASSIGNED:This study enrolled 165 patients. The anchor-based MCID for PROMIS UE was calculated to be 8.05 with an AUC of 0.814. The anchor-based SCB was calculated to be 10.0 with an AUC of 0.727. The distribution-based MCID was calculated to be between 3.12 and 8.65. The PASS was calculated to be 37.2 with an AUC of 0.90. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:The establishment of MCID, SCB, and PASS for PROMIS UE scores after shoulder arthroplasty provides meaningful and objective clinical interpretation of the improvements in outcome scores after TSA.
PMCID:8411069
PMID: 34505102
ISSN: 2666-6383
CID: 5006552
Complex Region Pain Syndrome Following Shoulder Surgery
Magone, Kevin M; Ben-Ari, Erel; Hacquebord, Jacques H; Virk, Mandeep S
Purpose/UNASSIGNED:To describe the clinical features, treatment, and outcomes in patients with complex region pain syndrome (CRPS) following shoulder surgeries. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Three patients were diagnosed with CRPS according to the Budapest criteria. Patients were followed up prospectively at regular intervals for a minimum of 2 years. Demographic data, clinical symptoms, physical examination findings, treatment received, and outcomes were collected and reported. Results/UNASSIGNED:The minimum time interval between surgery and diagnosis was 3 weeks (average, 8 weeks). The index procedures included 2 arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs and 1 open Latarjet. Neurologic pain, muscle spasms, hand and wrist swelling, and joint stiffness were seen in the shoulder, wrist, and hand, but the elbow was spared in all patients. Despite the use of multimodal treatment modalities, the symptoms were refractory to treatment for prolonged periods (range, 6-12 months). Hand and wrist symptoms took an average of 4 months longer than shoulder symptoms to improve. At the latest follow-up (range, 24-26 months), varying degrees of residual hand dysfunction, pain, and inability to make a fist or fully extend the fingers were noted in all 3 patients. Conclusions/UNASSIGNED:CPRS type 1 following shoulder surgery is a disabling condition with a long-protracted clinical course. CRPS can present as early as few weeks after shoulder surgery, with symptoms of neuropathic pain, spasm, and stiffness affecting the entire upper-extremity joints except the elbow. CRPS symptoms resolve earlier in the shoulder compared with the wrist and hand, with pain improving first, followed by recovery of motion and function. Residual stiffness affecting grip function is last to recover and can present up to 2 years after onset of symptoms. Although prompt recognition and multimodal approach are considered the mainstay of treatment, there is no gold standard treatment modality that can reproducibly alter the natural history of CRPS. Level of Evidence/UNASSIGNED:IV, therapeutic case series.
PMCID:8365219
PMID: 34430883
ISSN: 2666-061x
CID: 4989082
Comparison of radiographs and computed tomography (CT) imaging for preoperative evaluation and planning for shoulder arthroplasty
Liuzza, Lindsey G.; Abdelshahed, Mina M.; Oh, Cheongeun; Roach, Ryan; Looze, Christopher; Capeci, Craig; Kwon, Young W.; Zuckerman, Joseph D.; Virk, Mandeep S.
Background: The purpose of this study was to determine if addition of CT to axillary radiographs (AXR) alters preoperative decision making for shoulder arthroplasty. Methods: Preoperative deidentified images (XR alone and XR with CT) of 50 patients with glenohumeral arthritis were reviewed independently by 3 reviewers in a blinded fashion. Each reviewer graded images for glenoid wear pattern as simple (Walch A1 or B1) or advanced [A2, B2, C]), adequacy of AXR and need for advanced imaging. The reviewers determined a preoperative plan for all patients based on XR alone vs. XR and CT including the arthroplasty type (anatomic or reverse total shoulder) and their plan for treating glenoid wear (eccentric or standard reaming vs. bone graft or augment). Kappa values (κ) were calculated to determine inter-rater agreement and consistency among multiple reviewers. Fisher's exact test was used to assess any difference in preoperative plan once the shoulders were separated into simple and advanced glenoid wear patterns. Results: The 3 reviewers agreed that quality of AXRs was significantly inadequate (P <.001) for assessing glenoid wear in advanced glenoid wear patterns compared to simple wear patterns. Following evaluation on AXRs alone, the need for CT imaging was significantly higher in advanced glenoid wear patterns compare to simple ones (81% vs. 31%; P <.001). The addition of CT images did not result in a significant change to the preoperative plan in simple glenoid wear patterns but in advanced glenoid wear, addition of CT can change the preoperative plan with respect to arthroplasty type and/or strategy for addressing glenoid wear. Conclusion: Axillary radiographs are often inadequate for preoperative planning in shoulder arthritis with advanced glenoid wear patterns (Walch A2, B2, C types). Addition of CT imaging to radiographs in shoulder arthritis with advanced glenoid wear can affect the preoperative decision with respect to type of shoulder arthroplasty and/or plan for addressing glenoid wear (reaming, bone graft or augmented glenoids). Level of evidence: Level IV
SCOPUS:85107128369
ISSN: 1045-4527
CID: 4921782
The future of healthcare service in orthopedic practice: Telemedicine or in-person visits?
Ben-Ari, Erel; Kirshenbaum, Joshua; Patel, Ruby G; Kwon, Young W; Rokito, Andrew S; Zuckerman, Joseph D; Virk, Mandeep S
BACKGROUND:The objective of this study is to assess patient satisfaction and preference for telemedicine- versus in-person visits for outpatient shoulder and elbow musculoskeletal consultation during the COVID-19 pandemic and in the future. METHODS:Patients who had telemedicine visits for shoulder and elbow musculoskeletal complaints at a single institution from March through June, 2020, were invited to respond to a post-visit survey. The survey included a standardized questionnaire that focused on the patient's satisfaction with the telemedicine visit(s) during the pandemic and preference for using the telemedicine platform in the future following the pandemic. Additional details regarding their virtual visits (severity of their medical condition, previous virtual- or ER visits) were also obtained. Data regarding patient demographics and visit details (primary diagnosis, type of visit, length of visit, treating physician) were extracted from electronic medical records. RESULTS:In total, 153 patients participated in the study. Overall, high satisfaction scores regarding the telemedicine visit were noted: 91% of patients reported that their concerns were adequately addressed, 89% would recommend telemedicine to a friend and 94% stated that they would use this platform again in the presence of a situation like the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the majority of patients (76%) reported a preference for in-person visits for the same musculoskeletal complaint if it were not for COVID-19. A telemedicine visit duration of more than 10 minutes and a first-time telemedicine visit correlated with higher satisfaction rates (P=0.037 and P=0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS:COVID-19 has provided a boost to the use of our telemedicine platform, with a high satisfaction rate among patients with shoulder and elbow musculoskeletal complaints, largely due to safety reasons and limited access to in-person doctor visits. However, a considerable number of patients would have preferred in-person visits for similar health complaints if there were no pandemic. Further research on optimizing the selection of patients for telemedicine visits and addressing their expectations and concerns regarding their visits will improve patients' preference for future telemedicine visits.
PMID: 34089879
ISSN: 1532-6500
CID: 4899382
Locked Anterior-Inferior Sternoclavicular Joint Dislocation: A Case Report
Ben-Ari, Erel; Magone, Kevin M; Lowe, Dylan T; Costas, Bizekis; Rokito, Andrew S; Virk, Mandeep S
CASE:We report a rare variant of sternoclavicular joint (SCJ) dislocation, namely locked anterior-inferior dislocation, with unique clinical, radiographic, and intraoperative findings. In this variant, the medial clavicle was displaced anteriorly and inferiorly and locked in the manubrial-intercostal space, with corresponding mechanical dysfunction of the ipsilateral shoulder girdle joints. Symptoms unique to this variant included painful neck spasms and limited glenohumeral elevation. Nonsurgical treatment was not successful, and open reduction and ligament reconstruction resulted in correction of the fixed deformity with resolution of the clinical symptoms. CONCLUSION:Locked anterior-inferior SCJ dislocation is indicated for early open reduction and ligament reconstruction.
PMID: 33886520
ISSN: 2160-3251
CID: 4847342
Return to Play After Arthroscopic Stabilization for Posterior Shoulder Instability-A Systematic Review
Fried, Jordan W; Hurley, Eoghan T; Duenes, Matthew L; Manjunath, Amit K; Virk, Mandeep; Gonzalez-Lomas, Guillem; Campbell, Kirk A
Purpose/UNASSIGNED:To ascertain the rate and timing of return to play (RTP) and the availability of specific criteria for safe RTP after arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization. Methods/UNASSIGNED:Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to find studies on arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization. Studies were included if they reported RTP data or rehabilitation protocols and excluded if concomitant procedures influenced the rehabilitation protocol. Rate and timing of RTP, along with rehabilitation protocols, were assessed. Results/UNASSIGNED:This review found 25 studies, including 895 cases, meeting the study's inclusion criteria. The majority of patients were male (82.7%), with an age range of 14 to 66 years and a follow-up range of 4 to 148.8 months. The overall RTP rate ranged from 62.7% to 100.0%, and 50.0% to 100.0% returned to the same level of play. Among collision athletes, the overall rate of RTP was 80.0% to 100.0%, with 69.2%-100.0% returning to the same level of play. In overhead athletes, the overall rate of RTP was 85.2% to 100.0%, with 55.6% to 100.0% returning to the same level of play. Four studies (128 patients) specifically addressed the timing of RTP, and the range to RTP was 4.3 to 8.6 months. Specific RTP criteria were reported in a majority of studies (60%), with the most reported item being restoration of strength (44%). Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:There is a high rate of return to sport after arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization, ranging from 4.3 to 8.6 months after surgery. Return to preinjury level is higher for collision athletes compared with overhead athletes. However, there is inadequate reporting of RTP criteria in the current literature, with no clear timeline for when it is safe to return to sport. Level of Evidence/UNASSIGNED:IV, systematic review of level II to IV studies.
PMCID:7879176
PMID: 33615272
ISSN: 2666-061x
CID: 4793402
Patient and Physician Satisfaction with Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Sports Medicine Perspective
Kirby, David J; Fried, Jordan W; Buchalter, Daniel B; Moses, Michael J; Hurly, Eoghan T; Cardone, Dennis A; Yang, S Steven; Virk, Mandeep S; Rokito, Andrew S; Jazrawi, Laith M; Campbell, Kirk A
PMID: 33512302
ISSN: 1556-3669
CID: 4767672
Knotted versus Knotless Anchors for Labral Repair in the Shoulder - A Systematic Review
Matache, Bogdan A; Hurley, Eoghan T; Kanakamedala, Ajay C; Jazrawi, Laith M; Virk, Mandeep; Strauss, Eric J; Campbell, Kirk A
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of the current study is to compare biomechanical and clinical outcomes between knotless and knotted anchors in arthroscopic labral repair, specifically in 1) Bankart repair, 2) superior labrum, anterior-posterior (SLAP) repair, 3) posterior labral repair, and 4) remplissage augmentation of Bankart repair. METHODS:MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched according to the PRISMA guidelines to find biomechanical and clinical studies comparing knotted and knotless anchors using the search term "knotless anchor". RESULTS:Overall, 17 studies met inclusion criteria. There were 7 studies evaluating the biomechanical outcomes, of which 5 found mixed results between knotted and knotless anchors for arthroscopic Bankart repair, 1 demonstrated a difference for SLAP repair favoring knotless anchors, and 2 showed no significant difference for Remplissage in terms of ultimate load-to-failure. Four studies evaluated knotless labral anchors compared to knotted anchors in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair with no significant differences in outcomes reported between the two anchor types, except in one study that found an improved VAS score and a lower recurrence and revision rate with knotted anchors. Five studies evaluated knotless anchors compared to knotted anchors in patients undergoing SLAP repair, and none of the included studies found any significant differences in the patient reported outcome measures or revision rates. Of the 5 studies comparing operative time, 4 found a reduced time with knotless anchors. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The clinical results show no significant differences in outcomes between knotless and knotted anchors for labral repair in the shoulder, including Bankart repair, SLAP repair, and posterior labral repair. However, there was conflicting evidence supporting knotless or knotted anchors in the biomechanical studies. However, operative times may be reduced with the use of knotless anchors.
PMID: 33307150
ISSN: 1526-3231
CID: 4709502
No difference in 90-day complication rate following open versus arthroscopic Latarjet procedure
Hurley, Eoghan T; Manjunath, Amit K; Matache, Bogdan A; Jia, Nathan W; Virk, Mandeep; Jazrawi, Laith M; Meislin, Robert J
The purpose of this study was to compare the 90-day complication rate between the open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedure. A retrospective review of patients who underwent an open or arthroscopic Latarjet procedure at NYU Langone Health between 2012 and 2019 was performed. The complications, readmissions, and reoperations within 90 days were assessed. Outcomes were compared between the two approaches, and a p value of < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. The study included 150 patients (open: 110; arthroscopic: 40), with no patients lost to follow-up within the first 90 days. Both cohorts were similar in terms of patient demographics. No intra-operative complications were observed in either group. Overall, there were 4 post-operative complications with the open approach and 2 with the arthroscopic approach (3.6% and 5.0%, respectively; n.s.) during the study period. Three patients required a readmission within the 90-day period; one patient in both groups required a revision Latarjet for graft fracture, and one patient in the open Latarjet required irrigation and debridement for deep infection (n.s.). With the open approach, there were 2 (2.3%) wound complications, 1 graft complication, and 1 (1.1%) nerve injury. With the arthroscopic approach, there was 1 (2.8%) wound complication and 1 (2.8%) hardware complication. The safety, and 90-day complication and readmission profile of arthroscopic Latarjet is similar to open Latarjet procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
PMID: 33025054
ISSN: 1433-7347
CID: 4626882