Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Corticosteroid injections (CSIs) are commonly used in carpal tunnel syndrome; however, recent literature has demonstrated risk of postoperative infection associated with preoperative CSIs in other orthopedic fields. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship of CSIs and postoperative infection following carpal tunnel release (CTR). METHODS:A single-center retrospective review was conducted from 2010 to 2019 to identify patients who underwent CTR with subsequent antibiotic prescription for chart-documented wound infection. A demographically-matched cohort of 100 patients was identified for comparison. Information on patient demographics, comorbidities, injection history, and presence of postoperative infection was collected. RESULTS:Thirty-nine patients (0.67% of all CTR patients) were identified with postoperative infections, 3 of which (0.05% of all CTR patients) were deep infections. In the infection cohort, 16 of 39 (41%) patients received an injection prior to surgery, whereas 16 of 100 (16%) patients in the control cohort received an injection. History of CSI was significantly more common in patients with postoperative infection, and patients in the infection cohort had a significantly shorter average time from injection to surgery by approximately 55 days. CONCLUSIONS:Corticosteroid injections in the preoperative period are associated with postoperative infection after CTR. Proximity of injection to time of surgery plays a role, although comorbidities, the corticosteroid dose, and frequency of injection require further study to determine risk contribution. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Prognostic III.

BACKGROUND:Given the current national conundrum of decreasing microsurgery case volume performed by hand surgery fellows despite interest, program directors were surveyed to evaluate opinions of exposure gaps in training and to determine the current state of microsurgery training in 2020. METHODS:Anonymous national surveys were distributed to hand surgery fellowship program directors by the American Society for Surgery of the Hand. Subgroups were compared by training location and size of the fellowship program. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education public national data on graduate case log procedures by hand surgery fellows were reviewed. RESULTS:Eighty-eight surveys were distributed by the American Society for Surgery of the Hand to hand surgery fellowship program directors with a 44% (n = 39) response rate. Hand surgery fellowship programs from 19 US states participated. Most program's fellows had previous orthopedic surgery residency training with 41.03% of programs surveyed having 100% orthopedic surgery-trained fellows. The average number of weekly vascular microsurgical cases ranged from 25% of fellowships having no microsurgery cases per week, 46.2% having 1 per week, and only 7.7% having 5 or more cases per week. However, 60.5% of program directors prioritized a microvascular surgery case as the most valuable educational opportunity for fellows. Most program directors agreed (79.5%) that a 1-year hand surgery fellowship is sufficient to train a competent hand surgeon, who is proficient in microsurgery. In contrast, the majority disagreed (53.8%) that hand surgery microsurgery skills after a 1-year hand surgery fellowship are equivalent among graduates, regardless of a prior plastic surgery or orthopedic surgery residency training. There was a statistically significant difference in program directors' responses by geographic location regarding prior residency background impacting microsurgical skills (Kendall Ï„, -0.439; P = 0.001). Graduate case log data revealed an increasing trend in the number of microsurgery procedures performed by orthopedic hand surgery fellows until 2014, with a decline in cases per year and stagnating trend at 7% thereafter. CONCLUSIONS:In 2020, most hand surgery fellowship program directors highly value and prioritize microsurgery exposure for their hand surgery fellows' education despite the decrease in case volume for hand surgery fellows.

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.

BACKGROUND:Corticosteroid injections have proven benefit in the treatment of symptomatic trigger finger; however, the immune system and tissue repair modulating properties of corticosteroids justify further consideration in surgical candidates. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between corticosteroid injections and postoperative infection in trigger finger release. METHODS:A single-center retrospective review was conducted of patients seen from 2010 to 2019 to identify those who underwent trigger finger release with subsequent antibiotic prescription for chart-documented wound infection. A demographic matched cohort of 100 patients was identified for comparison. Preoperative corticosteroid injection history including timing, frequency, and dose was collected for all patients. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and presence of postoperative infection were collected from patient medical records. Superficial infection was defined as those requiring antibiotics for resolution without return to the operating room; deep infection was defined as infections that required irrigation and debridement. RESULTS:= .04). CONCLUSIONS:While corticosteroid injection in the preoperative period is associated with a higher rate of postoperative infection, the time before surgery and the corticosteroid dose do not appear to have an effect.

Over the past two decades, management of open distal tibial fractures has evolved such that a staged approach, with external fixation and débridement during the index procedure, followed by definitive fixation and wound closure at a later date, is often considered the standard of care. Although definitive treatment of these complex injuries is often done by a multidisciplinary team of surgeons well versed in periarticular fracture repair and soft-tissue coverage in the distal extremity, the on-call orthopaedic surgeon doing the index procedure must understand the principles and rationale of the staged treatment algorithm to avoid compromising definitive treatment options and ensure the best possible patient outcome. The mechanism of injury, neurovascular status, size and location of soft-tissue injury, fracture pattern, and concomitant injuries in the polytraumatized patient should direct the treatment plan and anticipated outcomes. This review focuses on evaluation and management of these complex injuries with an emphasis on early aggressive débridement, principles of initial fracture fixation, and modern options for soft-tissue coverage, including local and free tissue transfer.

Background  The second and third metacarpals are firmly attached, immobile structures which for the stable pillar of the hand. The trapezoid has been described as the keystone of the wrist, allowing a wide range of functional motion as well as inherent anatomic and biomechanical stability to the carpus. Case Description  We describe a novel boxing injury with a 180-degree in situ dislocation of the right trapezoid with concomitant second and third carpometacarpal (CMC) joint dislocations. Open anatomic reduction of the trapezoid was obtained, and subsequent percutaneous pinning of the metacarpals allowed for a full functional recovery and return to sports at 6 months. Literature Review  Combined trapezoid and CMC dislocations are extremely rare and have only been previously described in high-energy mechanism injuries, involving a direct dorsal force such as from the steering wheel in a motor vehicle collision. There are no previous reports of this injury occurring in the setting of direct axial load along the metacarpals in a clenched fist such as in a punch or fighting injury. Clinical Relevance  The rare nature of this combined injury, its novel mechanism, and the difficulty in interpreting acute injury and postreduction radiographs require that the treating physician have a high degree of clinical suspicion for associated injuries when CMC dislocations are identified. Treatment strategies incorporating intraoperative fluoroscopy, open anatomic reduction of the trapezoid under direct visualization along with closed reduction, and pinning of the metacarpals reestablish carpal stability and provide excellent long-term results.

Major peripheral nerve injuries are devastating and represent a very challenging clinical problem. Despite many years of advancement in peripheral nerve research, results so far have been fair at best, with only 50% of patients regaining useful function. Advancement of techniques in imaging, better understanding of the physiology of nerve recovery, improved repair and grafting options, and secondary reconstructive techniques, including tendon and nerve transfers, have helped facilitate a degree of more effective treatment. This article presents current concepts regarding the principles of management, expected outcomes, and new advancements in major upper extremity peripheral nerve injuries.

OBJECTIVE:This pooled analysis evaluates the association between the number of nerves transferred and postoperative outcomes after intercostal nerve (ICN) nerve transfer for elbow flexion. METHODS:A systematic and pooled analysis of studies reporting individual patient demographics and outcomes after ICN-musculocutaneous nerve (MCN) transfer for traumatic brachial plexus injury was conducted. The primary outcome was the ability to attain an elbow flexion Medical Research Council (MRC) score of ≥4 at the final postoperative follow-up visit. RESULTS: = 0.126). CONCLUSIONS:These results indicate that two ICN transfers may be as effective as three ICN and four ICN transfers and highlight the potential for nonsurgical factors to influence postoperative outcomes. Taken together, this pooled analysis leads us to question the utility of transferring >2 ICNs for MCN neurotization.

Hand trauma has always been a common etiology treated by the hand surgeon. However, the amount of severe hand trauma in the United States has decreased as the safety of working environments have improved and the amount of heavy industry jobs has decreased. Largely because of this, the typical hand surgery trainee is now exposed relatively infrequently to pathologies such as brachial plexus injuries, replantation surgery, and upper-extremity reconstructive microsurgery. Our hand surgery colleagues in countries such as India and China have a different experience, though. This difference provides an opportunity for educational exchange through the form of well-structured international fellowships. The American Society for Surgery of the Hand International Traveling Fellowship is specifically designed to supplement the training of young US hand surgeons in brachial plexus surgery, replantation surgery, and reconstructive microsurgery by spending short but intensive periods at some of the premier institutions in China and India.